AMERICAN PUBLIC EDUCATION INC 10-K

apei-20231231 UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 Form 10-K (Mark One) ☒ Annual Report Pursuant to Section 13 OR 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 For the fiscal year ended December 31 , 2023 or ☐ Transition report pursuant to Section 13 OR 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 For the transition period from ______ to ______ Commission file number: 001-33810 American Public Education, Inc. (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter) Delaware 01-0724376 (State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.) 111 West Congress Street, Charles Town, West Virginia 25414 (Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code) Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: ( 304 ) 724-3700 Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: Title of each class Trading Symbol(s) Name of each exchange on which registered Common Stock, $0.01 par value APEI Nasdaq Global Select Market Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes o No þ Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes o No þ Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes þ No o Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files). Yes þ No o Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, a smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company,” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. Large accelerated filer ☐ Accelerated filer þ Non-accelerated filer ☐ Smaller reporting company ☐ Emerging growth company ☐ If an emerging growth company indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. o Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed a report on and attestation to its management’s assessment of the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (15 U.S.C. 7262(b)) by the registered public accounting firm that prepared or issued its audit report. þ If securities are registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act, indicate by check mark whether the financial statements of the registrant included in the filing reflect the correction of an error to previously issued financial statements. o Indicate by check mark whether any of those error corrections are restatements that required a recovery analysis of incentive-based compensation received by any of the registrant’s executive officers during the relevant recovery period pursuant to § 240.10D-1(b). o Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes ☐ No þ The aggregate market value of the registrant’s common stock held by non-affiliates as of June 30, 2023, the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter, computed by reference to the price at which the common stock was last sold on the Nasdaq Global Select Market on that date, was approximately $ 77 million. The total number of shares of common stock outstanding as of March 1, 2024, was 17,505,345 . DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE Certain portions of the registrant’s Definitive Proxy Statement for its 2024 Annual Meeting of Stockholders (which is expected to be filed with the Commission within 120 days after the end of the registrant’s 2023 fiscal year) are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Annual Report. AMERICAN PUBLIC EDUCATION, INC. FORM 10-K INDEX Page PART I Item 1 Business 1 Item 1A Risk Factors 45 Item 1B Unresolved Staff Comments 80 Item 1C Cybersecurity 80 Item 2 Properties 81 Item 3 Legal Proceedings 81 Item 4 Mine Safety Disclosures 82 PART II Item 5 Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities 82 Item 6 [Reserved] 86 Item 7 Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations 86 Item 7A Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk 104 Item 8 Financial Statements and Supplementary Data 105 Item 9 Changes in and Disagreements With Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure 146 Item 9A Controls and Procedures 146 Item 9B Other Information 149 Item 9C Disclosure Regarding Foreign Jurisdictions that Prevent Inspection 150 PART III Item 10 Directors, Executive Officers, and Corporate Governance 151 Item 11 Executive Compensation 151 Item 12 Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters 151 Item 13 Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence 151 Item 14 Principal Accounting Fees and Services 151 PART IV Item 15 Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedule 152 Item 16 Form 10-K Summary 152 SPECIAL NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS This Annual Report on Form 10-K, or this Annual Report, including the sections entitled “Business”, “Risk Factors”, and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations”, contains forward-looking statements. We may, in some cases, use words such as “project,” “believe,” “anticipate,” “plan,” “expect,” “estimate,” “intend,” “should,” “would,” “could,” “potentially,” “will,” or “may,” or other words or expressions that convey future events, conditions, circumstances, or outcomes to identify these forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements in this Annual Report include statements about: • changes in and our ability to comply with the extensive regulatory framework applicable to our industry, including the 90/10 Rule, as well as state law and regulations and accrediting agency requirements, and the expected impacts of any non-compliance; • our ability to manage, grow, and diversify our business and execute our business initiatives and strategy; • our cash needs and expectations regarding cash flow from operations, including the impacts of our debt service and the dividend payments that are required to be paid on our Series A Senior Preferred Stock; • our ability to undertake initiatives to improve the learning experience, attract students who are likely to persist, and improve student outcomes; • changes to and expectations regarding our student enrollment, net course registrations, and the composition of our student body, including the pace of such changes; • our ability to maintain, develop, and grow our technology infrastructure to support our student body; • our conversion of prospective students to enrolled students and our retention of active students; • our ability to update and expand the content of existing programs and develop new programs to meet emerging student needs and marketplace demands, and our ability to do so in a cost-effective manner or on a timely basis; • our plans for, marketing of, and initiatives at, our institutions; • our ability to leverage our investments in support of our initiatives, students, and institutions; • our maintenance and expansion of our relationships and partnerships and the development of new relationships and partnerships; • actions by the Department of Defense, or DoD, or branches of the United States Armed Forces, including actions related to the disruption and suspension of DoD tuition assistance, or TA, programs and ArmyIgnitED, and expectations regarding the effects of those actions; • actions by the U.S. Department of Education, or ED, institutional and programmatic accreditors, and state authorizing agencies and expectations regarding the effects of those actions; • federal appropriations and other budgetary matters, including government shutdowns; • changes in enrollment in postsecondary degree-granting institutions and workforce needs; • the competitive environment in which we operate; • our ability to recognize the benefits of our cost savings efforts and their benefits; • challenges related to insourcing and outsourcing information technology services to our operations and third-party vendors, respectively; • our ability to manage and influence our bad debt expense; and • our financial performance generally. Forward-looking statements are based on our beliefs, assumptions, and expectations of our future performance, taking into account information currently available to us, and are not guarantees of future results. There are a number of important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from the results anticipated by these forward-looking statements. Risks and uncertainties involved in the forward-looking statements include, among others, the factors set forth below in “Summary of Risk Factors”. Forward-looking statements should be considered in light of these factors and the factors described elsewhere in this Annual Report, including in “Risk Factors” and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations”. You should read these factors and the other cautionary statements made in this Annual Report as being applicable to all related forward-looking statements wherever they appear in this Annual Report. If one or more of these factors materialize, or if any underlying assumptions prove incorrect, our actual results, performance, or achievements may vary materially from any future results, performance, or achievements expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements. We caution readers not to place undue reliance on any forward-looking statements made by us, which speak only as of the date of this Annual Report. We undertake no obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statements after the date of this Annual Report, whether as a result of new information, future events, or otherwise, except as required by law. Summary of Risk Factors We are subject to a variety of risks and uncertainties, including risks that could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows. The following summary of the principal factors that make an investment in our securities speculative or risky should not be relied upon as an exhaustive summary of the material risks facing us. You should read the following summary together with the more detailed description of risks that we deem material described under “Risk Factors” in Item 1A of this Annual Report and the other information contained in this Annual Report before investing in our securities. Risks Related to Attracting and Retaining Students • We depend on the effectiveness of our ability to attract students who persist in our programs. If we are unable to effectively market our programs or expand into new markets, our results of operations would be negatively affected. • Enrollments and course registrations by active-duty service members may be adversely affected by factors not directly related to education programs, including changes in military activity and budgets. • Continued declines in enrollments at Rasmussen University, or RU, could materially adversely affect RU’s and our profitability, financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows. • Changes our institutions may make to improve the student experience and enhance their ability to identify and to enroll students who are likely to succeed may adversely affect enrollment, profitability, financial conditions and results of operations. • Continued competition in the education market could decrease our market share and increase our cost of acquiring students, and if we are unable to successfully adjust to future market demands, our performance may be impaired. Risks Related to the Regulation of Our Industry • If we or our institutions fail to comply with regulatory requirements or to maintain institutional accreditation, we could face a decline in student enrollment, revenue, results of operations, or cash flows, sanctions or liability, and significant restrictions on operations, including loss of the ability to grant degrees or participate in DoD TA programs, Title IV programs, Department of Veterans Affairs benefits, and of access to federal student loans and grants. • If one of our institutions does not comply with the “90/10 Rule” for two consecutive years, it or they will lose eligibility to participate in federal student financial aid programs. • ED’s recently finalized gainful employment requirements could materially and adversely affect our business after they take effect. • The failure to meet applicable National Council Licensure Examination, or NCLEX standards could reduce our enrollments, revenue, and cash flow, lead to adverse actions by state boards of nursing, and limit our ability to offer or force us to close educational programs. • Recently introduced Florida legislation, if enacted, could have a material adverse impact on RU’s Florida nursing programs, RU’s planned Bloomington, Minnesota ADN program closure may adversely impact RU and us, and RU’s Illinois ADN program has been adversely impacted by regulatory action. • The inability of graduates to obtain outcomes in their chosen fields of study could reduce our enrollments and revenue, limit our ability to offer educational programs, and potentially lead to litigation that could be costly to us. • ED rules related to borrower defense to repayment claims may create significant liability. • Government and regulatory agencies and third parties may conduct compliance reviews, bring claims, or initiate investigations, enforcement actions, or litigation against us. Risks Related to Our Business • Our student registrations, revenue, and cash flow have been adversely impacted and we could continue to experience adverse impacts as a result of the Army’s transition to new systems for soldiers to request TA. • Economic and market conditions in the United States and abroad and changes in interest rates could affect our enrollments, success with placement and persistence, cohort default rates and ability to access additional capital. • Our business could be harmed if we experience a disruption in the ability to process Title IV financial aid. • Business combinations and acquisitions may be difficult to integrate, disrupt our business, dilute stockholder value, or divert management attention, and we may not realize the expected benefits of any consummated acquisitions. Efforts to diversify our business model may provide challenges that we are not prepared or able to address. • We have implemented a shared services model for services to our institutions, and challenges encountered due to the ongoing operation and expansion of this model could cause strategic or operational challenges. • We rely on third-party vendors whose service may be of lower quality than ours, whose responsiveness may be less timely than ours, and whose compliance practices may increase our operational and compliance risk. • We have incurred substantial indebtedness, the cost of servicing that debt could adversely affect our business and financial results, and we may not be able in the future to service that debt. • Our Series A Senior Preferred Stock provides rights, preferences, and privileges that are not held by our common stockholders, and is senior to our common stock. • We may not be able to successfully manage and limit our exposure to bad debt. • If we are unable to attract, retain, and develop skilled personnel, our business and growth prospects could be severely harmed, and changes in management could cause disruption and uncertainty. • We may not achieve the anticipated benefits of our cost savings efforts. Risks Related to Our Technology Infrastructure • Our ongoing transition away from Collegis, LLC for outsourced RU information technology and marketing functions to a new provider may not be timely, efficient, or cost-effective, or may pose other challenges. • We need to continue to expend time, money, and resources into our institutions’ information technology, which could adversely affect our systems, controls, and operating efficiency, and those of our institutions. • Significant information technology system disruptions could negatively impact our ability to generate revenue and could damage our reputation, limiting our ability to attract and retain students. • Cybersecurity incidents could compromise sensitive information and cause system disruptions and significant damage to our business and reputation. PART I ITEM 1. BUSINESS COMPANY OVERVIEW American Public Education, or APEI , provides online and campus-based postsecondary education to approximately 107,000 students, and career learning to approximately 27,000 individuals, through our subsidiary institutions. Our institutions offer purpose-built education programs and career learning designed to prepare individuals for productive contributions to their professions and society and to offer opportunities to advance students in their current professions or to help them prepare for their next career. Our Vision and Mission Our vision is for education that transforms lives, advances careers, and improves communities. Our mission is to Power Potential and Prosperity for Those Who Serve. Our institutions of advanced learning are purpose-built to prepare service-minded students for employment, careers, and leadership in a diverse and changing world. We are the number one educator of active-duty military and of veterans through American Public University System, a national leader in pre-licensure nursing education, focused on a Diploma in Practical Nursing, or PN degree, and an Associate Degree in Nursing, or ADN degree, through Rasmussen University and Hondros College of Nursing, and operate one of the largest providers of training to the federal government and public workforce through Graduate School USA. Our Institutions We have four subsidiary institutions: American Public University System, Rasmussen University, Hondros College of Nursing, and Graduate School USA. American Public University System APUS provides online postsecondary education to approximately 89,800 adult learners. APUS traces its roots to American Military University, or AMU, which was founded in 1991, as a distance-learning, graduate-level institution for military officers seeking an advanced degree in military studies. Since then, APUS has broadened its focus to include other military communities, veterans, and public service and public service-minded communities, with a focus on educating those who serve, and has two components: AMU, which is focused on educating students from the military, national security, military-affiliated and service communities, like police, firefighters, emergency personnel, and government employees, and American Public University, or APU, which is focused on educating career-focused working adults with an emphasis on educating professionals working in service-related communities, including nursing, public health, public administration, and business administration. Today, a majority of APUS students are undergraduate-level students in addition to its graduate and certificate students. APUS is exclusively an online institution of higher learning, designed to meet the needs of the military, military-affiliated, public service, and working adult students. Many of these students serve in positions requiring extended and irregular work schedules, are on-call for rapid response missions, participate in extended deployments and exercises, travel or relocate frequently, and often must balance family and work demands. Although APUS’s focus has broadened since its founding, it continues to have an emphasis on its relationship with the military community. As of December 31, 2023, approximately 66% of APUS’s students self-reported that they served in the military on active duty at the time of initial enrollment, and approximately 11% of APUS’s students self-reported that they are a military veteran. The remainder of APUS’s students are other military or military-affiliated professionals (such as reservists or National Guard members), public service professionals (such as law enforcement personnel or other first responders), and other non-military students (such as working adult students and military spouses). APUS is institutionally accredited by The Higher Learning Commission, or HLC, a regional accrediting agency recognized by the U.S. Department of Education, or ED. Most other higher education institutions accept APUS’s courses for transfer credit as a result of this accreditation. HLC will conduct a focused visit at APUS in March 2024 after raising concerns regarding compliance with standards related to program development oversight and program assessment processes as a result of course availability in one program. APUS has a Standard Pathway designation, having transitioned from the Open Pathway in 2023 because of HLC’s decision to conduct a focused visit. All institutions on the Standard Pathway, including APUS, must undergo a mid-cycle comprehensive evaluation. A reaffirmation of accreditation site visit date will take place 2030-2031. 1 Rasmussen University RU provides nursing- and health sciences-focused postsecondary education to over 14,100 students at its 22 campuses in six states and online. At the beginning of its 123-year history, RU focused on educating business students to prepare them for practical careers in bookkeeping, secretarial services, and accounting. RU’s foundation of education that transforms lives created an institution built to serve those not typically served by traditional higher education. While RU continues to offer programs across a broad range of study including business, technology, and education, it expanded its breadth and embarked on providing healthcare education in 2006. Today, RU offers a comprehensive “ladder” of nursing degrees, including pre-licensure PN and ADN degrees, post-licensure Bachelor of Science in Nursing, or BSN, and RN to BSN degrees, Master of Science degrees in Nursing, Specialties and Nurse Practitioner, and a Doctorate of Nurse Practice. RU is committed to innovation in program delivery. For example, RU offers competency-based education, or CBE, helping to advance this learning approach where students learn by doing, manage their pace, and stay connected with faculty and peers. Additionally, virtually every nursing program at RU incorporates online content alongside lab and clinical or classroom components. As of December 31, 2023, approximately 5,700 students are pursuing nursing degrees at RU, over 90% of whom are enrolled in RU’s pre-licensure nursing degree programs, and approximately 8,400 students are enrolled in non-nursing programs. RU is institutionally accredited by HLC with an Open Pathway designation, and all of RU’s Nursing programs are programmatically accredited by specialty nursing accrediting bodies. As with APUS, most other higher education institutions accept RU’s courses for transfer credit as a result of RU’s HLC accreditation. APEI acquired RU on September 1, 2021, which we refer to as the Rasmussen Acquisition, adding what we believe is an attractive portfolio of programs to APEI, with a strong alignment around mission and culture. Hondros College of Nursing HCN provides nursing education to approximately 3,100 students across eight campuses in three states. HCN offers pre-licensure nursing programs that are designed to prepare individuals for productive careers through both a PN degree and an ADN degree, and two Direct Entry ADN degree options that offer an accelerated graduation pathway for students who meet certain transfer, academic, and entrance exam requirements. HCN’s students principally receive on-campus instruction at one of HCN’s campuses and online for certain courses for those that prefer remote course learning. As of December 31, 2023, approximately 65% of HCN students were enrolled in a PN program and 35% were enrolled in an ADN program. HCN is institutionally accredited by the Accrediting Bureau for Health Education Schools, or ABHES, a national accrediting agency recognized by ED. HCN’s PN program is accredited by the National League for Nursing Commission for Nursing Education Accreditation, or NLN CNEA. Graduate School USA GSUSA, based in Washington, DC, is one of the largest providers of career learning to the federal government and public employee workforce. We acquired substantially all of the assets of GSUSA on January 1, 2022, advancing our focus on delivering training that provides students with pathways to employment and career advancement. GSUSA provides contract training to more than 100 federal government agency customers and through direct enrollment by federal, state, and municipal government employees, contractors, and non-government employees. GSUSA provides career learning online as well as in-person at its headquarters facility in Washington, D.C. and at government and customer sites. GSUSA offers a catalog of more than 300 courses specializing in foundational and continuing professional development, as well as leadership training and practice management through its Center for Leadership and Management and Government Audit Training Institute. GSUSA trained over 27,000 individuals in 2023. GSUSA is accredited by the Accrediting Council for Continuing Education and Training, or ACCET. 2 Our Segments We have three reportable segments: the APUS Segment; the RU Segment; and the HCN Segment. Unallocated corporate activity, eliminations, and GSUSA’s results are included in “Corporate and Other” in the Consolidated Financial Statements. Financial information regarding each of our reportable segments is reported and discussed in this Annual Report in the sections entitled “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations”. The following information for our segments is as of and for the year ended December 31, 2023. 2023 Developments and Future Financial Objectives Campus Expansions and Relocations In 2023, HCN relocated its former Fairborn, Ohio campus, located in a suburb of Dayton, Ohio, to a new, larger and more convenient, location in Dayton to better serve its students. HCN also intends to relocate its Toledo and Columbus, Ohio campuses to new, larger locations nearby. These relocations are expected to be completed in the summer and fall of 2024, respectively. In April 2023, RU completed the relocation of its Topeka, Kansas, campus to a new, larger location to expand its campus footprint and offer larger classrooms with improved nursing skills and simulation labs. In addition, RU intends to combine two campuses located in Ocala, Florida, into a single, expanded campus to improve the student experience. Insourcing of Marketing and Information Technology RU has historically outsourced the vast majority of its marketing and information technology functions through two contracts, one for each of marketing and information technology, with Collegis, LLC, or Collegis. In October 2022, RU and Collegis mutually agreed to the termination of the marketing services contract, effective January 31, 2023, and completed the transition of RU marketing to our in-house centralized marketing team. Outsourced information technology services under the Collegis information technology contract will continue through September 2024, when we intend to allow the contract to expire, and transition all information technology functions currently outsourced to Collegis back to our operations and to one or more third-party vendors. In December 2023, we entered into an agreement to outsource certain of our information technology operations to a managed service provider, including service desk, end user support, and network support and operations. Executive Leadership Changes During 2023, we made strategic hires aimed at bolstering our ability to deliver improved student experience and outcomes, accelerating growth and transformation, including a new President of RU, a new President of GSUSA, and a new 3 Chief Marketing Officer. Please refer to “Our Institutions and Our Operations – Information About our Executive Officers” below for additional information about our executive officers serving as of the date of this Annual Report. Rasmussen University Regulatory Metrics RU’s new leadership team focused in 2023 on improving various regulatory metrics at RU, particularly NCLEX pass rates. We increased our focus on these metrics in 2023 in light of RU’s ADN enrollment declines, as a result of both voluntary and imposed enrollment caps in large part due to NCLEX pass rates below requisite state thresholds, as discussed further in the Risk Factors captioned “RU is currently on provisional certification with ED, and the terms of that provisional certification could limit its potential for growth” and “Continued declines in enrollments at RU could materially adversely affect RU’s and our profitability, financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows.” We believe that initiatives put in place by RU’s leadership during 2023, together with changes to the NCLEX that were implemented in April 2023, resulted in improvements to RU NCLEX pass rates, including improvements in the ADN program pass rates at nearly every campus in the second half of 2023 as compared to the first half of 2023. We expect NCLEX pass rates and regulatory metrics more generally to be a continued area of focus and improvement in 2024. 90/10 Compliance Outlook We had a sustained focus in 2023 on the “90/10 Rule, which is described under “Student Financing Sources and Related Regulations/Requirements – Department of Education – Regulation of Title IV Financial Aid Programs – Financial Responsibility” below. While each of our institutions was in compliance with the 90/10 Rule for 2023, APUS’s relevant percentage for 2023 was 89%. In 2023, enrollments from students who use TA funds trended upward, while enrollments from students who use non-federal educational assistance funds continued to decline, causing APUS’s 90/10 percentage to increase and move closer to the threshold. Compliance with the “90/10” Rule will continue to be an area of focus, and despite our efforts, there can be no assurance that we will continue to be able to comply in future years, particularly at APUS. See the Risk Factors captioned “If one or more of our institutions does not comply with the 90/10 Rule, it or they will lose eligibility to participate in federal student financial aid programs” and “Our student registrations, revenue, and cash flow have been adversely impacted and we could continue to experience adverse impacts as a result of the Army’s transition to new systems for soldiers to request TA” for more information. Cost and Expense Reductions During 2023, we initiated several cost and expense reduction efforts, including a reduction in force in the third quarter that resulted in the termination of 74 employees and the elimination of 57 open positions across a variety of roles and departments at APEI, RU, HCN and GSUSA. The headcount reductions reflect our ongoing efforts focused on realigning our organizational structure, eliminating redundancies, and optimizing certain functions. We incurred an aggregate of approximately $3.0 million of pretax cash expenses associated with employee severance costs as a result of this reduction in force, all of which were incurred in the third quarter of 2023. The reduction in force is expected to result in pre-tax labor and benefit savings of approximately $15.5 million on an annualized basis. Share Repurchase Program On March 16, 2023, our Board of Directors confirmed the availability under an existing share repurchase program to repurchase up to approximately $8.0 million of shares of our common stock. We fully expended this $8.0 million as of April 30, 2023, and repurchased a total of 1,335,357 shares of our common stock. On November 27, 2023, the Board of Directors authorized a new program to repurchase up to an additional $10.0 million of shares of our common stock. In the fourth quarter, we repurchased 180,409 shares of our common stock under this repurchase authorization for an aggregate purchase amount of $1.6 million. In the aggregate, in 2023 we repurchased 1,515,766 shares of our common stock for $9.7 million. In January 2024, we repurchased 251,146 shares of our common stock for an aggregate purchase amount of $2.8 million. Effective February 1, 2024, we ceased purchases under this purchase authorization. Financial Objectives We strive to build on the momentum created by our actions and achievements in fiscal 2023 and to continue to execute on our strategic plan. Specifically, we are focused broadly on (i) achieving public market scale by growing the revenue of our enterprise organically and inorganically and (ii) delivering improved enterprise-wide operating margins. Our Market and Competition 4 Market Characteristics The overall U.S. postsecondary education market is large, with approximately 4,500 institutions of higher learning, diverse in its business models, and fragmented such that no one institution has a significant market share. Most postsecondary institutions, including for-profit postsecondary institutions, regardless of where they are located, how they are organized, or who they serve, face challenges, including: • demand for relevance and return on investment, as they must prepare students with relevant skills to work in new and rapidly changing industries, respond to technological change, and support employers in efforts to optimize and advance their workforce; • focus on quality and affordability, including via questions from potential students, lawmakers, the media, and others about the quality and cost of postsecondary education and the impact of poor quality and high costs; • changes in consumer demands as prospective students look to unbundle their education and pursue credentials outside of degrees; • a continually changing regulatory environment; • fluctuations in enrollment as evidenced by industry-wide undergraduate enrollment growth of 2.1% in the fall 2023 as compared to an overall industry-wide enrollment decline of 0.7% in the fall 2022; and • rapid technological transformation, including through increasing demand for online offerings and the utilization of technology to enhance student learning, and emerging artificial intelligence, or AI, technologies. Competition In addition to the characteristics outlined above, the U.S. postsecondary education market is characterized by intense competition. Competitive factors include, among other things: • the quality of the academic program and alignment to high growth jobs; • affordability; • breadth of degree offerings; • flexibility in delivery models; • frequency of course or program starts; • faculty experience; • level of support for student success; • career counseling and placement services; • reputation; • effectiveness in attracting college-ready students; and • compliance track record. Institutions Serving Military Students APUS has focused on serving the military community since its founding, and the community continues to be a primary source of APUS students. Approximately 2,500 institutions serve military students through participation in Department of Defense, or DoD, tuition assistance, or TA, programs, including APUS. APUS’s primary competitors for military students are other institutions offering online instruction and colleges and universities offering on-campus instruction near military installations. We believe that APUS will continue to see competition in the military community from both not-for-profit and for-profit schools, as well as from the Armed Forces themselves, including through distance learning programs. For example, the Navy in 2019 launched the U.S. Naval Community College, or the USNCC, a community college supporting naval education for enlisted service members. The USNCC now provides education to approximately 2,600 service members, and it plans to eventually achieve the capability to accommodate up to 25,000 students. While a number of schools with which APUS competes are participating partners with the USNCC, as a for-profit institution, APUS is not an eligible partner. As traditional not-for-profit public and private schools advance online capabilities, we believe that they will also present increasing competition for APUS. The U.S. military is demonstrating increased levels of support for credentials other than degrees, which we believe could lead to enhanced competition from institutions serving military students. For example, Credentialing Opportunities On-Line, or COOL, is a program for each of the military branches and DoD civilians that links military occupations and experiences to civilian credentials (e.g., occupational certifications, licenses, and apprenticeships). The Army also offers an 5 expanded credentialing program called the Army Credentialing Assistance Program, or Army CA, which is designed to support soldiers who wish to pursue civilian credentials, licenses, and certifications that may lead directly to a specific job. We believe other service branches may follow the Army’s example or pursue other approaches to enhancing support for credentialing, including, for example, the Coast Guard’s CA Program. APUS was previously an approved training provider for Army CA programs but ceased offering courses under the Army CA program in November 2022. Nursing Programs RU and HCN’s nursing programs are offered as campus-based programs in the geographic areas surrounding their campuses. In the approximately 20 market areas where RU and HCN’s combined 30 on-ground nursing campuses are located, we compete with a mix of community colleges, public and private postsecondary institutions, and other career-focused nursing colleges offering similar pre-licensure nursing programs. Because of the relatively local focus of these pre-licensure programs, our competitive environment is moderately fragmented and affected by various factors specific to the states and particular areas where campuses are located, including local supply and demand for nurses and nursing schools. We are also continuing to focus on growing our post-licensure nursing programs, for which the competitive environment is less fragmented and has larger competitors, including because RN to BSN and other post-licensure degrees are available online as well as in traditional campus-based environments. Other Public and Postsecondary Institutions Within the broader postsecondary education market, our institutions compete primarily with not-for-profit, public, and private two-year and four-year colleges, as well as other for-profit schools, particularly those that offer online learning programs. Due to an increase in online postsecondary offerings, we face increased competition as students pursue degree and credential-based postsecondary education from a wider selection of online offerings. For example, we anticipate increased competition from campus-based postsecondary institutions as they continue to increase online degree programs and develop more non-traditional programs. Most public institutions are aided by substantial government subsidies. Public and private not-for-profit institutions benefit from grants, tax-exemptions, contributions, and other financial resources not widely available to for-profit institutions. Many public competitors also benefit from longstanding name recognition and are able to directly recruit students in a more cost-effective manner, especially in their local markets. Many private institutions are able to make larger investments in marketing, as their cost of tuition is higher than tuition at our institutions. Non-Traditional Competition We also face competition from competing schools and others providing non-traditional education programs, often without charge or at low costs, including: • institutions offering competency-based education, or CBE, programs and single course or course packages aimed at credentialing outcomes rather than degree outcomes; • corporate training and other companies partnering with universities or the federal government to offer alternative educational paths for students and the federal government workforce, respectively; • entities providing coding bootcamps or micro-credentials; and • non-degree granting institutions such as massive online course providers. We believe that our institutions will continue to face new competition from non-traditional programs. For more information on competition within the postsecondary education market in which we compete, refer to “Risk Factors – Risks Related to Attracting and Retaining Students”. Our Opportunities and Strengths Our Opportunities Active-Duty Military and Veterans The U.S. military community will continue to be an important market segment for online education. We believe service members will continue to seek respected universities that provide military-focused support services coupled with an 6 online curriculum and flexible scheduling. We believe service members are particularly interested in postsecondary credentials that offer both career advancement within the military and preparation for employment outside of the military. We believe that military veterans represent another important addressable market for online education. The U.S. Census Bureau estimates that in 2023 there were approximately 1.4 million veterans aged 18 to 34 and 3.9 million veterans aged 35 to 54. We believe that our military heritage, affordability, and online offerings are attractive to veterans. New policies and campaigns to facilitate the hiring of veterans may lower barriers to non-military jobs and facilitate veteran-owned businesses. As these policies and campaigns lower barriers to non-military jobs and facilitate veteran-owned businesses, we believe online universities offer valuable educational opportunities for veterans regardless of where they live, work, or learn. Nursing The expanding need for healthcare coupled with a nursing shortage continues to drive significant demand for nursing education. Projected employment for licensed practical nurses and registered nurses is expected to grow by approximately 5% and 6% annually, respectively, from 2022 to 2032, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Occupational Outlook Handbook. When factoring in the need to replace workers who transfer to different occupations or exit the labor force, such as to retire, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics projects openings each year for registered nurses of approximately 193,100, and approximately 54,400 for practical nurses, through 2032. There is significant unmet demand from qualified students for nursing educational programs. Despite anticipated job opportunity growth, qualified applicants are not always accepted by nursing programs, primarily due to program selectivity, a shortage of clinical sites, faculty, and resource constraints. However, given the state and regulatory approvals necessary, investment in campuses, specialized programmatic knowledge and related accreditations, clinical placement requirements, time to receive approval to grow enrollments, and various standards that nursing schools must meet, we believe there are challenges for new entrants to nursing education. We also believe we may distinguish ourselves from our competitors by developing direct partnerships with healthcare providers as they become more involved in educating and training their future workforces, of which nurses are the largest segment. Career Learning U.S. employers are increasingly reporting significant gaps between required skills and the capabilities of their workforce. Working adults also recognize the need to be lifelong learners. We believe employers and professional associations will seek partnerships with academic institutions to advance the skills and productivity of their workforce through higher education and career learning programs, which we see as an opportunity, particularly for APUS, RU, and GSUSA. We also believe that there is an opportunity to expand the APUS brand more broadly to attract students beyond its historical constituency. Our Competitive Strengths Return on Educational Investment and Affordability Our institutions are committed to continually assessing and enhancing our academic programs and student services to offer a high-quality education and facilitate successful outcomes for our students and graduates that align with employer needs. In addition, as described in “Our Institutions and Operations – Human Capital” below, our institutions focus on excellence by hiring experienced faculty and continuing to develop their capabilities. Providing affordable, quality degree and certificate programs is an important element of our competitive strategy. The combined tuition and fees at APUS are generally less than the average in-state cost at a public university. APUS’s low tuition and fees, in combination with APUS-funded tuition grants and book grants provided to all undergraduate students result in significant savings and mean that APUS students are not required to take on as much debt as they might at another institution. APUS’s generous transfer credit policy, and use of open educational resources, further reduce a student’s out-of-pocket costs. Tuition and fees at RU and HCN are also designed to be affordable and competitive when compared with those of similar institutions offering the same level of flexibility, accessibility, and student experience. RU students may also lower their total cost of attendance through self-directed assessments, which provide savings by permitting students who demonstrate proficiency in a subject to test out of courses. Similarly, HCN students may apply performance-based grants and needs-based grants toward the balance of their tuition. Please refer to “Our Institutions and Operations – Our Institutions – Affordability and Cost of Attendance” below. 7 We believe that, given broad concerns about rising tuition and student loan debt in higher education, there are opportunities to create awareness and attract college-ready students with the primary message of affordability and value, in order to help achieve a Higher Education Return on Investment for our Customers, or HEROIC TM . Relevant Offerings Aligned with Demand Our institutions offer programs aligned to jobs that U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data and non-governmental organizations have indicated as high growth areas. Our institutions are also committed to continually assessing and enhancing our academic programs and student services to offer a high-quality education and facilitate successful outcomes for our students and graduates that align with employer needs. The depth and breadth of APUS’s and RU’s non-nursing program offerings are designed to effectively address the diverse needs of students who enter into education programs with vastly different educational and career backgrounds and goals. For example, APUS utilizes Industry Advisory Councils to evaluate its current curriculum and determine the career relevance of programs and degrees, which facilitate efforts to connect APUS’s curriculum to the industries and the students it serves and to deliver a high-quality academic product. RU and HCN, meanwhile, create new nurses to meet the significant imbalance of supply and demand that exists for nurses by preparing and training nursing students to enter the nursing profession as licensed nurses. Flexible Program Offerings Our institutions offer flexible learning modalities to meet the needs of busy working adults. APUS offers online delivery with monthly starts and academic support offerings are individualized to students’ needs, while RU offers CBE programs, a blend of online and in person courses for their nursing and other healthcare-related programs, and flexible start dates and online courses for other programs. HCN offers PN and ADN programs that accommodate working adults by offering on-campus instruction, online instruction for certain courses, as well as daytime and evening/weekend options. GSUSA offers virtual and in-person instructor-led, blended, and on demand online courses to accommodate the need for immediate application-specific training. Market Leadership Our status as a market leader in key areas we serve means that we operate from a position of strength in those areas. APUS is the number one educator of active-duty military and of veterans. Since its founding, APUS has broadened its focus to include other military communities, veterans, and public service and service-minded communities, with a focus on a broad purpose of “educating those who serve.” As of December 31, 2023, approximately 66% of APUS’s students self-reported that they served in the military on active duty at the time of initial enrollment, and approximately 11% of APUS’s students self-reported that they are a military veteran. We are also a national leader in pre-licensure nursing education. RU has more than 5,700 nursing students at its 22 campuses across six states and online with over 90% of those students pursuing a pre-licensure PN degree, ADN degree, or post-licensure BSN degree. Finally, we are one of the largest providers of training to the federal and public employee workforces through GSUSA with its extensive portfolio of government agency customers and directly enrolled federal government employees. Expansive Nursing Footprint Our institutions train nurses at 30 campuses across nine states and online. Given the state and regulatory approvals necessary, the investment in physical campus facilities, the specialized programmatic knowledge and related accreditations, clinical placement requirements, the time to receive approval to grow nursing enrollments and various standards that nursing schools must meet, we believe nursing education – and in particular first or pre-licensure nursing education – provides us with opportunities to distinguish ourselves from our competitors. In addition, we believe we are one of the only educators with a full “ladder” of nursing curriculum from PN to Doctoral degrees. Our Business Strategy and Goals Win with Service-Minded Students At our core is a recognition of the importance of individuals who serve the country and society at large. We aim to deliver on our vision of education that transforms lives, advances careers, and improves communities by “educating those who serve.” Our institutions are purpose-built to educate the service-minded student by offering programs designed to prepare individuals for contributions to their profession and society and to provide opportunities to advance students in their current professions or help them prepare for their next career. 8 We seek to offer curriculum in bundles that resonate with service-minded students. We expect to continue to focus on education that provides real skills and pathways to employment and career advancement in fields that align with demand. We aim to deliver differentiated, memorable learner experiences across the entire student journey. Deliver a Return on Higher Education Investment We seek to maximize a student’s return on their educational investment. We believe learners are looking for a practical solution that provides value in return for their educational investment and that fits their lifestyle and values. We believe there are opportunities to create awareness and attract college-ready students with the primary message of affordability and value. Grow a National Nursing Platform We are focused on expanding nursing opportunities through geographic campus expansion and the expansion of our programs and course offerings. This focus includes expansion of our post-licensure enrollments, particularly at RU where key post-licensure programs have already been established and are primarily delivered online, which represents an opportunity for our alumni and other already-licensed nurses to advance their nursing careers. We also seek to enhance provider partnerships to act as a catalyst for enrollment growth and defray student costs. We intend to continue to seek opportunities for both organic and inorganic growth, including by exploring acquisitions of other nursing schools. Build a Career Learning Platform We believe that our institutions provide us with a foundation from which we can build a career learning platform. We intend to expand GSUSA into new domains and models. We seek to enter into new, and expand existing nursing provider partnerships such as those at HCN. For example, during the fourth quarter of 2022, HCN entered into a tuition scholarship program with a national healthcare provider to provide scholarships to ADN students at its Toledo, Ohio campus in exchange for a work commitment following graduation. In the fall of 2023, HCN partnered with another national healthcare organization to provide similar scholarships to ADN students at its Columbus, Ohio campus. Additionally, among our institutions’ offerings are certificate programs, credentialing, and CBE programs. Transform the Company to Achieve Sustainable Growth We aim to increase our public market scale by growing the revenue of our enterprise organically and inorganically and delivering improved enterprise-wide operating margins. We intend to develop capabilities to drive organic growth and plan to continue to assess and pursue strategic investments and acquisitions and integrate and grow them for inorganic growth. Our strategy is organized around areas where we believe we have “the right to win.” For example, we will continue to focus on being the top educator for active-duty military and veterans and pre-licensure nurses. We also aim to deliver improved enterprise-wide operating margins by continuing to exercise financial discipline and taking steps such as our efforts focused on realigning our organizational structure, eliminating redundancies, and optimizing certain functions. Focus on Regulatory Metrics We strive to deliver a quality, competitive education, which goes hand-in-hand with demonstrating compliance with various regulatory standards and metrics. We expect to continue to focus on the core elements of our business that are necessary to meet these standards and metrics. For example, in our nursing programs, we continue to be focused on improving various achievement metrics, particularly around NCLEX pass rates and retention statistics, and at APUS, we continue to focus on making sure we comply with the 90/10 Rule. Optimize Our Cost Structure Through the Shared Services Model We aim to deliver better, faster, more cost effective, responsible, scalable results for our institutions by providing shared services to them, as noted in “Our Institutions and Operations” below. We believe that the shared services model promotes the efficient use of resources. 9 OUR INSTITUTIONS AND OPERATIONS We provide postsecondary education through three educational institutions of higher learning: APUS, RU, and HCN. We also provide career learning to the federal government workforce through GSUSA. Each institution is primarily responsible for its own academic mission, while APEI performs certain business functions on a shared basis for the benefit of APUS, RU, HCN, and GSUSA, with the capability to further expand these shared services to these entities. We believe that the shared services model promotes the efficient use of resources. Our Institutions Programs and Areas of Study We offer a total of 184 degree programs, 134 certificate programs, and four diploma programs, through our institutions. We offer programs across a broad range of fields of study, including public service-focused fields such as nursing, national security, military studies, intelligence, and homeland security, as well as traditional academic fields such as business, health science, information technology, justice studies, education, and liberal arts. In addition, through GSUSA, our offerings also include career learning opportunities in leadership, finance, human resources, and other fields of study critical to the federal government workforce. Programs Number APUS Doctoral Degrees 2 Master’s Degrees 46 Bachelor’s Degrees 58 Associate Degrees 31 RU Doctoral Degrees 1 Master’s Degrees 5 Bachelor’s Degrees 19 Associate Degrees 21 HCN Associate Degrees 1 Total Degree Programs: 184 Certificates APUS 111 RU 13 GSUSA 10 Total Certificates: 134 Diplomas RU 3 HCN 1 Total Diplomas: 4 Total Programs, Certificates, and Diplomas 322 General Academics APUS offers 137 degree programs and 111 certificate programs across five schools of study. More than 1,800 distinct courses are available in either eight- or sixteen-week formats. Most APUS academic terms begin on the first Monday of each 10 month. APUS’ certificate programs generally require a minimum of 18 credit hours and focus on a particular component of a broader degree program. Among those programs are 19 undergraduate and 18 graduate NanoCerts TM programs, focused programs comprised of three academic courses in a related area of interest that provide skills necessary for career or professional development and result in a micro credential. RU offers over 60 programs across seven schools of study in addition to nursing. RU offers more than 775 distinct courses in 5.5 or 11-week formats with terms beginning in January, April, July, and October of each year. Nursing RU offers a comprehensive “ladder” of nursing degrees, including a pre-licensure Diploma in PN, ADN degree, and a BSN degree, as well as the post-licensure RN to BSN degree, Master of Science in Nursing degree and Doctorate of Nurse Practice. In addition, RU also offers a post-graduate nursing certificate. HCN offers on-campus instruction leading to a Diploma in PN and an ADN degree, as well as a Direct Entry ADN degree option that offers an accelerated graduation pathway for students who meet certain transfer, academic and entrance exam requirements. Portions of these programs are taught online. Academic terms for HCN’s PN and ADN programs begin four times each year, with courses starting in January, April, July, and October. Graduates of RU and HCN’s PN and ADN programs are eligible to seek licensure after passing the applicable National Council Licensure Examination, or NCLEX, exams. Government Training GSUSA offers professional development and training courses for federal government agencies and the federal government workforce, serving organizations and individuals with programs designed to support organizational missions, career and occupational development, and the personal ambitions of adult learners. GSUSA’s offerings include more than 300 courses across 14 program areas. Student Body Overall, our institutions have approximately 107,000 students enrolled online and at 30 campuses across nine states, with enrollment calculated differently depending on the institution. In addition, GSUSA trained over 27,000 individuals in 2023. The student body of APUS consists of approximately 89,800 enrolled students, most of whom are employed full-time. Student enrollment is defined as the number of unique active students, including those who take an approved leave of absence, who are currently attending a course or have completed at least one course within the last 12 months. As of December 31, 2023, approximately 66% of APUS’s students self-reported that they served in the military on active duty at the time of initial enrollment, and approximately 11% of APUS’s students self-reported that they are a military veteran. The remainder of APUS’s students are other military or military-affiliated professionals (such as reservists or National Guard members), public service professionals (such as law enforcement personnel or other first responders), and other non-military students (such as working adult students and military spouses). Many APUS students have significant prior education and career experiences; 91% are working adults and the average age of APUS students is 31. APUS is designed to serve those adult learners with tailored offerings to support them in successfully reaching their individual goals. RU provides education to approximately 14,100 enrolled students. Student enrollment is defined as the number of unique active students, including those who take an approved leave of absence. RU offers programs across a broad range of fields of study, with a focus on healthcare, specifically nursing education. At RU, 81% of students are over the age of 25 and 73% are female. As of December 31, 2023, approximately 5,700 students are pursuing nursing degrees at RU, over 90% of whom are enrolled in RU’s pre-licensure degree programs. HCN provides nursing education to approximately 3,100 students at eight campuses in three states. The average HCN student is approximately 33 years old and 93% of HCN students are female. Accreditation Our institutions have institutional accreditation, and their programs often have programmatic or specialized accreditation. Institutional accreditation is an important attribute of our institutions. Colleges and universities depend, in part, on accreditation in evaluating transfers of credit and applications to graduate schools. Students and sponsors of tuition reimbursement programs look to accreditation for quality assurance, and employers rely on institutions’ accredited status when evaluating a candidate’s credentials. In 2023, APUS transitioned from the Open Pathway designation to the Standard Pathway designation. As a result of this transition, APUS will be subject to a focused site-visit in March 2024 and will be subject to a 11 comprehensive site-visit for the year four mid-cycle review under the Standard Pathway, to take place in 2025. The reaffirmation of accreditation site visit date remains unchanged and will take place 2030-2031. RU has institutional accreditation from HLC with an Open Pathway designation, with the next comprehensive evaluation for reaffirmation of accreditation scheduled for May 2026. HCN is institutionally accredited by ABHES, and in February 2021, ABHES granted HCN continued accreditation through February 2027 for all programs at all campuses. GSUSA is accredited by ACCET. In addition to institutional accreditation, certain of our programs offered have received specialized accreditation. For example, the Accreditation Council for Business Schools and Programs accredits approximately 15 different business-focused academic programs offered by APUS and accredits APUS’s accounting program under a specialized accounting accreditation. The Commission on Collegiate Nursing Education accredits the Bachelor and Master of Science in Nursing programs at APUS and RU. Certain programs offered by RU have received specialized accreditation as well. For example, RU’s ADN and Licensed Practical Nursing programs are accredited by the Accrediting Commission for Education in Nursing. HCN’s PN program is accredited by NLN CNEA. RU and HCN’s locations and programs are approved by state agencies as well. For example, the nursing education programs offered by RU and HCN are approved by the relevant state boards of nursing. For more information on accreditation and licensure, please refer to “Regulatory Environment – Accreditation” and “Regulatory Environment – State Authorization/Licensure” in this Annual report. Admissions and Admissions Standards We work to attract students who are more likely to persist and succeed in our programs and continue to work to identify and implement changes and initiatives in an effort to attract and enroll more college-ready students more effectively. We welcome students to apply for admission at any time through online application processes at APUS, HCN, and RU. The current qualification for most undergraduate programs is a high school diploma or General Education Development certificate. Applicants for graduate programs must hold a bachelor’s degree from an accredited U.S. institution or an equivalent foreign institution. Certain programs may have additional admissions standards and restrictions. For example, RU and HCN require prospective nursing students to achieve qualifying entrance exam scores for certain programs. Affordability and Cost of Attendance We have long been focused on offering our students affordable programs. Affordable tuition has been a priority of APUS since its founding. APUS tuition remains among the lowest in the four-year for-profit sector. The combined tuition and fees at APUS are generally less than the average in-state cost at a public university. APUS costs are more than 25% less than the average in-state full-time undergraduate tuition, fees, and books at four-year public universities, based on the final 2022-2023 institutional data reported to ED through the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System. This low tuition and fees, in combination with APUS-funded tuition grants and book grants provided to all undergraduate students, resulted in significant savings to APUS students. Additionally, APUS’s generous transfer credit policy, and use of open educational resources, further reduce a student’s out-of-pocket costs. Tuition and fees at RU and HCN are also designed to be affordable and competitive with those of similar institutions offering the same level of flexibility, accessibility, and student experience. Tuition and Fees APUS implemented tuition and fee increases for its non-military and veteran students in the second and third quarters of 2023. At APUS, following the tuition increases, tuition for undergraduate courses is $350 per credit hour, while tuition for master’s level classes is $425 per credit hour. In general, a bachelor’s degree may be earned for $42,000 in tuition costs at current tuition rates, and APUS master’s degrees may be earned for $15,300 in tuition at current tuition rates. APUS does not charge an admission fee or fees for services such as registration, course drops, or similar events that trigger fees at many other institutions. Because APUS is an exclusively online institution, there are no required resident fees, such as for parking, food service, student union, and recreation. Students taking graduate courses at APUS are charged a technology fee of $85 per course. When applicable, APUS students are charged certain additional fees, such as graduation, late registration, transcript request, and comprehensive examination fees. In the second quarter of 2024, as part of the continuous improvement initiatives in education quality, APUS plans to implement a modest tuition increase to master’s students across all categories, including military, non-military, and veteran students. RU’s costs vary among its programs and between part-time and full-time attendance. In January 2023, RU implemented tuition increases for select programs to help offset the increased cost of delivering a quality education. RU’s ADN program typically costs $409 per credit hour in addition to course fees. Credit hour costs range from $199 per credit hour to 12 $419 per credit hour for other undergraduate programs. At the graduate level, RU offers six different master’s programs for $205 per credit hour or less. RU charges a $175 course technology and resource fee for each course. Students may purchase required textbooks or e-books through RU for a flat fee of $15 for each textbook (traditional or e-book) for each course. HCN’s costs vary among its programs. In the second quarter of 2023, HCN implemented a 5% increase in tuition and fees across all programs to offset the increased cost of delivering a quality, competitive education. HCN’s PN program may be completed for approximately $19,600 in tuition and fees and the ADN program may be completed for approximately $27,800 in tuition and fees, depending on the campus location. Fees include the cost of examination review materials, lab fees, and test review fees, among others. Some of these costs are payable to HCN and others are payable to third parties. HCN’s students also incur costs for textbooks, supplies, uniforms, and its technology package. These costs vary by program and are paid for by HCN’s students as the textbooks or supplies are needed. HCN estimates that over the life of its programs, a student’s costs related to textbooks and supplies will be approximately $4,000 for the PN program and $6,000 for the ADN program. At RU and HCN, tuition increases are adjusted to be consistent with the local campus markets. Even inclusive of recent increases, RU and HCN’s tuition and fees are designed to be affordable and competitive when compared to the tuition and fees at similar institutions. Grants and Other Fee Reduction Opportunities Prior to September 2023, to support APUS’s active-duty military students using TA, APUS provided an APUS-funded tuition grant so that undergraduate and master’s students who are eligible for TA benefits and their spouses and dependents had a net tuition of $250 per credit hour. In September 2023, APUS removed the APUS-funded tuition grant and APUS began providing a Preferred Military Rate of $250 per credit hour for undergraduate and master’s level courses, for all U.S. active-duty service members, National Guard members, Reservists, and military families. Active-duty military students using TA at the undergraduate level are expected to generally have no out-of-pocket expenses. In the second quarter of 2023, coinciding with the tuition increases described above, APUS added a 10% Veteran Grant for veterans and veteran’s family members, on standard undergraduate and master’s level courses. In addition, veterans who qualify for 100% of their Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act of 2008, or Post-9/11 GI Bill, benefits are expected to generally have no out-of-pocket expenses either. Active-duty military undergraduate students and their spouses and dependents enrolled in courses for academic credit at APUS receive textbooks and certain course materials at no additional cost to them through an APUS-funded institutional book-grant program. APUS also utilizes open access and online library materials where appropriate and works with various publishers to reduce the cost of textbooks and course materials for both graduate students who pay for textbooks and course materials and for APUS, which funds the book grant. At RU, students can lower their total cost of attendance through self-directed assessments, which provide savings by permitting students who demonstrate proficiency in a subject to test out of courses. Self-directed assessments, when available, may be attempted for a prepaid fee, which is generally $149 per attempt. HCN students may apply performance-based grants and needs-based grants toward the balance of their tuition after all other funding sources. HCN offers an institutional affordability grant to students demonstrating financial need to cover the difference between the total cost of tuition and fees less the amount of all eligible financial aid resources. The grant is designed to limit a student’s monthly payment to $200 through an award of up to $200 per month, or $600 per term after consideration of financial aid, employer tuition reimbursement, and other financial resources. HCN offers its students an extended payment plan option. The extended payment plan is designed to assist students with educational costs including tuition and fees. Payment plans require ongoing payments while the student is enrolled in a program and extend after the last day of attendance or graduation. To the extent interest is applied, it is generally fixed and does not accrue until the student departs the program or graduates. The extended payment plan options do not impose any origination fees. Sources of Student Financing and Financial Aid Our students finance their education through a combination of individual resources, ED’s Title IV programs, private loans, state and federal grants, institutional grants, TA, Department of Veterans Affairs, or VA, educational benefits, and corporate reimbursement programs. Most students rely on some form of financial aid in addition to their individual resources. At APUS, students utilizing DoD’s TA programs as their primary source of payment accounted for 48%, those utilizing VA education benefits 22%, those utilizing ED’s Title IV programs 17%, and those utilizing cash and other sources 13%, of 13 revenue in 2023. At RU, students utilizing ED’s Title IV programs as their primary source of payment accounted for 75%, those utilizing cash and other sources 23%, and those utilizing VA education benefits 2%, of revenue in 2023. In addition, most HCN students rely on some form of financial aid in addition to their individual resources. We believe that the ability of our students to participate in these programs is essential to the success of APUS, RU, and HCN. Participation in TA, VA education benefits, and Title IV programs adds to our institutions’ regulatory burden and results in increased regulatory scrutiny, as described more fully below in “Regulatory Environment – Student Financing Sources and Related Regulations/Requirements”. Federal legislative activity and actions by ED, DoD, and VA may adversely impact the ability of our students to obtain tuition financing, which as with any other limitations on tuition financing could have a material adverse effect on enrollments and our financial condition, as described more fully below in “Risk Factors – Risks Related to Our Business”. Student Retention and Academic Outcomes Our institutions are focused on executing initiatives that will more effectively support their students and help improve those students’ educational outcomes. Improved engagement is an important element in our goal of retaining qualified students. For example, APUS and RU improve engagement through, among other things, faculty engagement initiatives and co-curricular initiatives to increase the level of engagement and collaboration in the classroom and strengthen the bond between those institutions and their students. We also carry out initiatives intended to improve the educational outcomes of our students. For example, RU’s Council for Nursing Excellence is dedicated to helping students pass the NCLEX exam the first time by identifying student-specific challenge areas and providing customized tutoring resources and faculty training. We believe these initiatives contributed to improved NCLEX scores at certain campuses in 2023. RU also plans to integrate NCLEX testing simulation and preparation tools throughout the curriculum and to conduct a curriculum assessment to identify areas where RU can better enable student mastery and success. Career Development We believe assisting students in advancing their careers in their current profession or securing employment after completion of their programs or courses is an essential part of our mission. Our institutions offer an array of career services, including complementary personalized career advice for students and alumni through direct interaction with career services staff, career events such as in-person and virtual job fairs and on-campus recruiting, and institution-sponsored online job boards. APUS also offers career planning tools, such as an interest assessment to identify career options that fit student interests and guides to careers associated with student majors, and career preparation services, such as mock interview services, resume review services, and social media review services to improve students’ employer-facing online profiles. RU provides a variety of self-service resources, including access to a networking, job posting, a career research website, online resume building and interview preparation tools, webinars, and video tutorials, as well as online programmatic advising by dedicated career services advisors. We strive to link students directly with employers where we can. For example, during the fourth quarter of 2022, HCN entered into a tuition scholarship program with a national healthcare provider to provide scholarships to ADN students at its Toledo, Ohio campus in exchange for a work commitment following graduation. In the fall of 2023, HCN partnered with another national healthcare organization to provide similar scholarships to ADN students at its Columbus, Ohio campus. Marketing and Branding We strive to align our marketing efforts with our business and strategy and to tailor our marketing approach to our educational offerings and the students we serve. This approach encompasses all our learning modalities, from online to on-campus to hybrid, and all our educational outcomes, from certification to degree, and leading to the career outcomes students seek after they leave us. As part of these efforts, we continue to highlight certain key marketing and branding messages that align with our strategy, including educating those who serve, affordability and value. We execute our marketing efforts through both direct-to-student and business-to-business channels. Our marketing relationship with students extends across the entire student journey from recruitment to post-graduation and includes efforts to drive student awareness, improve student onboarding, increase persistence, improve student performance, and focus on career outcomes. We aim to market to students wherever they may be, through their chosen media or marketing channel, and in the geographies where they are located. Our approach includes in-person and relationship-based marketing as well as digital (including search, company-owned and external content, social media, and streaming services), and more traditional media television, radio, and print marketing efforts. 14 We also work with partners we believe can provide us with better access to students who will persist in our institutions’ programs. Nearly 25% of our RU enrollments are associated with an alliance or partner relationship. We have agreements with over 300 employers whose employees pursue an education at RU. At APUS, this includes partnerships with community colleges, which prepare students for transfer opportunities to APUS for bachelor’s degree programs. At RU and HCN, we have begun establishing new partnerships with healthcare providers to further career outcomes and defray costs of education, as discussed more fully in “Our Institutions – Career Development” above. Marketing efforts tailored for our institutions consider prospective and current students, including their respective educational goals. To that end, APUS marketing has historically had a relationship-based focus on building long-term relationships with businesses, professional organizations, and individuals in the military, military-affiliated, and public service communities. We also have programs at APUS that aim to assist members of the military as they transition into private sector jobs. RU and HCN nursing program marketing includes leveraging relationships with and marketing to the healthcare community, and in late 2022 we increased our non-nursing marketing for RU in response to demand, which continued throughout 2023 and which we expect will continue as part of our 2024 marketing strategy. In 2022, we began efforts to centralize our marketing organization. Our centralized team is currently providing all marketing and branding services through a shared service model to APUS and GSUSA, and providing many of these services for HCN. RU historically relied on Collegis for a variety of outsourced marketing services. In October 2022, RU and Collegis mutually agreed to the termination of the marketing services contract effective January 31, 2023, and we have completed the transition of RU marketing to our in-house centralized marketing team. We are also developing marketing expertise that spans a variety of functional areas and to extend our use of marketing technology and analytics. We currently use technology and analytics to improve marketing mix, audience targeting, new initiatives, messaging, and creative decisions, as well as advertising development, delivery, and testing. In 2023, to support all of our institutions, we also hired subject matter experts in all key marketing functional areas. Information Technology Information technology systems are essential to our student experience and our business operations. APEI provides information technology services to our institutions through a shared services model. In addition, RU is party to a service agreement with Collegis to provide information technology services through September 2024. RU currently relies on Collegis for a variety of outsourced information technology functions, including data center, learning management system, user support, and network and voice services, and its technology infrastructure is currently hosted, managed, and supported by Collegis. Our Ongoing Technology Transition We are in the midst of a multi-year technology transformation program to enable us to enhance the learning experience for students, better accommodate new flexible learning modalities, and improve the operational effectiveness of our enterprise. In April 2022, we notified Collegis that we intend to permit RU’s contract with Collegis to expire by its terms in September 2024. We plan to insource all the technology and services currently provided by Collegis to cloud services or third-party vendors over which we will have management oversight. As part of the transition from Collegis, we plan to continue looking more broadly for opportunities to further improve operational effectiveness across our information technology operations and rationalize our technology portfolio. For example, in December 2023, we entered into an agreement to outsource a number of our information technology operations, including some that were previously being handled by Collegis, to a managed service provider, including service desk, end user support, network support and operations. Student Information and Instructional Delivery Our core enterprise systems are (i) our student information and services systems, or SIS, platforms which our institutions use to interact with and provide support to students in areas such as admissions, registration, tuition payment, grade reporting, progress toward degrees, and various other functions, (ii) our learning management systems, or LMS, platforms, which our institutions use to deliver course content and support teaching, learning, and collaboration, and (iii) our customer relationship management systems, or CRM, which manage our admissions functions. At APUS, we have a legacy customized SIS that we refer to as Partnership at a Distance™, or PAD, and proprietary information systems and processes to support PAD. RU uses Anthology Campus Nexus as its SIS. The RU SIS environment is currently hosted with Collegis, which maintains all systems, support, and hosting for RU. APUS and RU admissions functions are managed inside of Salesforce and connected to PAD for APUS and Anthology for RU to ensure all pertinent information is synchronized appropriately. HCN and GSUSA have their own SIS platforms. In 2024, we plan to replace the existing SIS 15 platform used by GSUSA and will also begin moving HCN to a new SIS platform. More broadly, we continue to review and assess our student information and services platforms and their capabilities, including whether to consolidate to a standard platform across more or all our institutions. PAD is designed to enable APUS to provide each student with individualized support at appropriate times from pre-enrollment through and beyond graduation, including student advising, administrative support, and community networking. We continually evaluate PAD for changes and upgrades and anticipate that we will eventually make significant changes to or replace this system. In 2021, we consolidated APUS and HCN onto a single, cloud based LMS platform, Brightspace by D2L. RU uses Blackboard Ultra as its LMS platform. This environment is hosted with Blackboard, which is now owned by Anthology. All RU support for Blackboard Ultra is currently provided by Collegis. We are continuing to consolidate APUS’s customer relationship management systems onto a single platform, the first phases of which were completed in 2022. In early 2023, at APUS we launched a new native mobile application to improve the student experience. The APUS mobile application provides current and future students with university information and access to academic tools via mobile and tablet, 24/7. Key features include registration, academic dashboard, task Manager, program tracker, and real-time notifications. In addition to our student information and services systems, LMS platforms, and CRM systems, we also have several other systems that support the student experience, financial aid processing, fiscal management, human resources processes, marketing, and decision support. Our Information Technology Infrastructure The backbone of our information technology infrastructure currently consists of two co-location data centers. Our technology environment is managed internally and through a third-party managed service provider. Student access to our systems is provided through redundant data carriers. RU’s network is fully redundant through a software-defined wide area network infrastructure. We intend to continue to migrate much of our infrastructure and core applications to a cloud computing model with the goal of improving the reliability, scalability, agility, and security of our core infrastructure and applications. Human Capital Strategy and Values Our ability to deliver on our mission and to continue to transform our enterprise to focus on quality student outcomes and on sustainable growth is tightly aligned with our human capital strategy. Our performance depends on the talents, experience, and efforts of our employees, and on our ability to foster a culture and practice of high performance, innovation, cooperation, integrity, and respect. We seek to be a destination for high-potential employees and desire to build a bench of future leaders by developing best-in-class human capital capabilities. During 2023, our key human capital efforts focused on centralizing certain components of our human capital strategy, including implementing a common talent acquisition methodology and common talent management and talent review process, as well as centralizing and improving responses to human capital inquiries through our HR Operations AskHR team. We also continue to implement a streamlined and proactive approach to employee communication to drive connectivity, engagement, and efficiencies. As of December 31, 2023, APEI’s employee population comprised the following: Faculty Members (Full-Time) Other Professional Staff (Full-Time) Total Full-Time Employees Faculty Members (Part-Time) Other Professional Staff (Part-Time) Total APUS 326 568 894 1,341 6 2,241 RU 263 465 728 1,627 300 2,655 HCN 135 160 295 63 39 397 GSUSA — 54 54 256 10 320 Corporate — 422 422 — 2 424 Total 724 1,669 2,393 3,287 357 6,037 16 Our employees have diverse backgrounds, influenced in part by the geography in which our headquarters, administrative facilities, and campuses are located, and by the communities we serve, in particular military, military-affiliated, veteran, and nursing communities. As of December 31, 2023, our employee diversity was as follows: Female (1) People of Color (2) APUS 53 % 23 % RU 79 % 32 % HCN 78 % 28 % GSUSA 55 % 44 % Corporate 57 % 26 % (1) Consists of employees self-identifying as female. (2) Consists of employees self-identifying as Black or African American, Hispanic, Asian American, Native American, or more than one race or ethnicity. Diversity and inclusion is a business imperative at the core of our values, and we believe that diversity and inclusion reflects the expectations of students we serve. In the first quarter of 2023, we launched an enterprise-wide, cross-functional Inclusion and Impact Council that includes members of executive leadership, as well as inclusion champions from across all of our education units, and focuses on driving awareness and harmonization around diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging initiatives. To support our diversity and inclusion efforts, we also have diversity and inclusion task forces and committees at our institutions. Talent Development and Retention We believe the quality of our faculty and non-faculty staff is critical to the student experience and student outcomes and is therefore vital to our institutions’ success. Hiring competition is intense, especially for faculty in specialized areas and qualified executives. RU and HCN also compete with both nursing schools and traditional employers of healthcare professionals to fill open faculty positions. A nursing faculty shortage continues, adversely affecting our ability to recruit and retain qualified nursing faculty at RU and HCN. We believe that current job market dynamics, including low unemployment, have further increased the challenge of hiring and employee retention. We strive to retain our talent and closely track retention among our employees, both faculty and staff. In 2023, we had full-time employee turnover of approximately 19%, of which 73% was voluntary and 27% was involuntary. In 2022, we had full-time employee turnover of approximately 28%, of which, 70% was voluntary and 30% was involuntary. Although we have taken additional steps to retain our current faculty and source and recruit talent, there can be no assurance that our efforts will be successful. Our strategic initiatives require our personnel to perform at a high level and to adapt and learn new skills and capabilities. New faculty members complete on-boarding, orientation, and training. All faculty have annual development opportunities and requirements. In addition, our institutions regularly review faculty performance. We have implemented a centralized talent and transformation team to focus on improving internal learning and development practices and succession planning to ensure that we cultivate skills needed to deliver high quality student outcomes and help grow our operations. In 2023, we executed an enterprise-wide talent review for all vice-president and above employees to ensure a consistent review of talent and more meaningful development plans for those leaders, as well as enhanced succession planning. We also invested in both change management and integration talent at the Company level to assist in further integrating our institutions, and we continued our centralized and consistent compliance training approach across the organization. We are committed to working to ensure that new hires and employees are fully trained on key compliance issues at hire and also on an annual basis during the duration of employment. We also review all required compliance trainings annually to ensure the training is comprehensive. Staffing our Institutions We believe that hiring and retaining well-educated and qualified faculty members is important to our success. We continue to centralize more of our talent acquisition function in an effort to improve talent search efficiency, increase the consistency of our sourcing practices, and strengthen hiring processes. This centralization has significantly reduced our time to fill metrics and improved our ability to assess talent needs company-wide. 17 At APUS, approximately 65% of our full-time faculty have a terminal degree in their field of study, and virtually all undergraduate faculty members hold graduate degrees. Many APUS faculty members have relevant experience at other universities and within military, corporate, and government institutions. At RU and HCN, all nursing faculty have earned a BSN or higher. In addition to having the necessary educational requirements, RU and HCN seek faculty members who have demonstrated experience in the field of nursing. Employee Engagement and Relations We measure employee engagement, including faculty, on an ongoing basis by soliciting feedback, including a company-wide annual employee engagement survey for all employees, in order to understand the views of our employees. The results from engagement surveys are used to implement programs and processes designed to enhance employee engagement and improve the employee and faculty experience. None of our employees are parties to a collective bargaining agreement, and management considers employee relations to be good. Health and Safety We are committed to the health and well-being of our employees and assess our well-being initiatives and marketplace trends on an ongoing basis. Beginning in 2022, and continuing in 2023, we have increased our focus on employee well-being and have enhanced our Total Rewards Team, which is focused on benefits and well-being. In 2023, we added paid parental leave to support our employees and their families and additional paid time off, including time for volunteerism, as additional retention tools. Since the abatement of the COVID-19 pandemic, we have allowed employees to return to a hybrid work setting. Employees are continuing to follow a blended model of working onsite and remotely, and we have committed to determining the optimal mix of site-based, flexible, and fully remote work models on a department and role basis. Community Impact We intend for our Inclusion and Impact Council to lead efforts to ensure that we positively impact the communities in which our employees work and live, including by organizing volunteer opportunities. Beginning in 2023, we provided full-time employees, faculty, and staff with eight hours of additional paid time off for volunteering and giving back to society. Information About our Executive Officers Set forth below is certain information concerning our executive officers serving as of the date of this Annual Report. Name Age Position Angela K. Selden 58 President and Chief Executive Officer, APEI Richard W. Sunderland, Jr., CPA 63 Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, APEI Craig S. MacGibbon 60 Executive Vice President, Chief Information Officer, APEI Thomas A. Beckett 56 Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary, APEI Tanya J. Axenson 48 Senior Vice President, Chief Human Resources Officer, APEI Karmela Gaffney 56 Senior Vice President, and Chief Marketing Officer Nuno S. Fernandes 47 President, APUS Paula R. Singer 69 President and Chief Academic Officer, RU Harry T. Wilkins 67 Chief Executive Officer, HCN Angela K. Selden joined us in September 2019 as President and Chief Executive Officer and a member of our Board of Directors. Ms. Selden had previously served as Chief Executive Officer of DIGARC, LLC, an education technology provider to higher education institutions, since October 2016. From July 2015 until April 2016, Ms. Selden was Interim Chief Executive Officer of Skybridge Americas, a global contact center and provider of fulfillment solutions, and she served as a member of its board of directors from July 2015 through December 2018. Prior to Skybridge Americas, Ms. Selden served as Chief Executive Officer of Workforce Insight, LLC, a global provider of strategic workforce management, from 2014 to 2015, after Workforce Insight’s acquisition by Baird Capital Partners, where Ms. Selden served as Executive in Residence from 2013 to 2014 and participated in the acquisition of Workforce Insight. Prior to her role at Baird, Ms. Selden served as Chief Executive Officer and Executive Co-Chairman of Arise Virtual Solutions, Inc., a virtual workforce solutions outsourcer from January 2005 until 18 August 2011. Earlier in her career, Ms. Selden spent 18 years at Accenture, including serving as the Managing Partner leading Accenture’s North American West Consumer and Industrial Products group to significant growth. Richard W. Sunderland, Jr., CPA joined us in February 2011 as a consultant and became Senior Vice President of Finance of APUS in December 2012. In January 2014, Mr. Sunderland was appointed Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of APEI. Prior to joining APUS, Mr. Sunderland served as the Chief Financial Officer of NovaSom, Inc. from 2008 to 2010. In addition, Mr. Sunderland served as Chief Financial Officer of Active Day, Inc. between 2005 and 2008, and in various roles, including as Controller, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, of NeighborCare, Inc. from 1993 to 2004. Craig S. MacGibbon joined us in August 2022 as Executive Vice President and Chief Information Officer. Prior to joining APEI, Mr. MacGibbon was a partner of Wavestone US (formerly WGroup), the North American arm of Paris-based global management and IT consulting firm Wavestone, from July 2019 to August 2022. Before joining Wavestone US, Mr. MacGibbon was the Chief of Application Development and Support of Synovus Financial Corporation from August 2015 to August 2019, Vice President of Global Shared Services of Las Vegas Sands Corporation from 2014 to 2015, Chief Information Officer of UIL Holdings Corporation (now Avangrid) from 2013 to 2014 and Senior Vice President and Chief Information Officer of Enterprise Solutions of Fifth Third Bank from 2010 to 2013. Mr. MacGibbon has also held leadership roles with Michelin North America, Hubbell Inc., Emerson Electric Co., and Goldwell Cosmetics. Mr. MacGibbon began his career in the US Navy, serving four years as an Avionics technician. Thomas A. Beckett joined us in April 2011 as Director, Legal Affairs for APUS, in January 2012 became Vice President, Legal Affairs, and since January 2016, has served as our Senior Vice President and General Counsel, and Secretary since June 2016. Prior to joining APUS, Mr. Beckett was the General Counsel and Chief Operating Officer of HealthSport, Inc. and its wholly owned subsidiary, InnoZen, Inc. (now CURE Pharmaceutical) from 2007 to 2010. In addition, from 2004 to 2010, Mr. Beckett held various leadership positions at HealthSport and InnoZen. Prior to this, Mr. Beckett was an associate at King & Spalding LLP and Holland & Knight LLP. Mr. Beckett began his career as a banking officer with First Union National Bank. Mr. Beckett is on the board of directors of Shenandoah Telecommunications Company, a wireless telephone and cable services company. Tanya J. Axenson joined us in July 2022 as Senior Vice President and Chief Human Resources Officer. Prior to joining APEI, Ms. Axenson served as Senior Vice President of HR and Chief Diversity Officer of Erickson Senior Living, which develops, operates, and manages continuing care retirement communities, from January 2021 to July 2022. Previously, Ms. Axenson also served as Vice President and Chief Human Resources Officer of Aerotek, Inc., a leading talent solutions provider, from September 2012 to January 2021. Ms. Axenson also previously held various other human capital and legal roles at Exelon/Constellation Energy, an energy provider, and served as an associate attorney at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP. Karmela Gaffney joined us in July 2023 as Acting Chief Marketing Officer before being hired for the role full-time in December 2023. Prior to joining APEI, Ms. Gaffney served as the Chief Marketing Officer of Academic Partnerships from 2020 to 2022 and Senior Vice President of Digital and Integrated Marketing at the same company from 2018 until 2020. Prior to this, Ms. Gaffney was Vice President, eCommerce and Phoenix.edu at University of Phoenix from 2015 to 2018 and was Vice President, Digital Commerce at Choice Hotels International from 2013 to 2015. Ms. Gaffney also previously held various leadership roles at Best Western Hotels & Resorts. Nuno S. Fernandes joined APUS as President in August 2022. Prior to joining APUS, Mr. Fernandes served at Ilumno, a company that partners with universities in Latin America to expand access to higher education throughout the region, as President and Chief Executive Officer from May 2019 to August 2022, Executive Vice President, Global Operations and Strategic Alliances from April 2018 to May 2019, Executive Vice President, Strategic Alliances from May 2017 to April 2018, Senior Vice President, Global Operations from September 2016 to May 2017, Chief Marketing and Operations Officer from September 2015 to September 2016, Senior Vice President Marketing, Enrollment and Student Services from January 2014 to September 2015 and Senior Vice President Marketing, Enrollment from January 2013 to January 2014. Mr. Fernandes has also held various leadership roles at Overseas Leisure Group and Bosch. Paula R. Singer joined us in April 2023 as President and Chief Academic Officer of RU and as a non-voting member of our RU Board of Directors. Prior to joining RU, Paula spent 27 years at Laureate Education, Inc. where she retired in January 2022 as the CEO of Laureate Online and Walden University. During her tenure with Laureate Education, Inc. Ms. Singer served as chairman of Walden University for 19 years. Ms. Singer is the co-founder and principal owner of Nurture Nest Montessori School and serves as a board director at the University of Connecticut Foundation. 19 Harry T. Wilkins rejoined us in May 2019 as the Chief Executive Officer of HCN, a position he previously held from December 2013 until his retirement in December 2015. From July 2021 until June 2022, Mr. Wilkins was also the Executive Vice President, Strategy, Growth and Innovation of APUS. Prior to December 2013, Mr. Wilkins served as our Chief Financial Officer of APEI. Prior to serving as the Chief Financial Officer of APEI, Mr. Wilkins had various executive roles, including serving as the Chief Financial Officer, at Strayer Education, Inc., now Strategic Education, Inc. Intellectual Property We and our institutions own and exercise rights associated with patents, copyrights, trademarks, service marks, domain names, agreements, and registrations to protect our intellectual property. Our institutions own or license all course syllabi and course and instructional materials developed by their faculty and employees and, as such, these course materials may be used by our institutions in current and future courses as needed to facilitate instruction and may be modified by our institutions to meet evolving course or curriculum requirements. In general, our institutions do not assert ownership claims to scholarly works of their faculty, such as articles and books, which were not developed as course materials. Such intellectual property of our institutions’ individual faculty members remains the property of each such faculty member and is reserved specifically for use only by the faculty member who owns it unless the faculty member grants permission for use by others. Our institutions rely on agreements under which they obtain rights to use course content developed by faculty members and other third-party content providers. Our institutions own the copyright for a work by a faculty member where there has been express agreement on such ownership, if the institutions compensated the faculty member for the particular product, or if the institutions funded the research in whole or in part. We or our institutions have secured or claim rights to trademarks for various names and terms used in our and their respective businesses, including rights in “American Public Education, Inc.,” “American Public University System,” “American Military University,” “American Public University,” “Graduate School USA”, “Rasmussen University”, and others. In connection with our acquisition of HCN, we received a royalty-free, irrevocable, exclusive, transferable, sublicensable license to use the name “Hondros College of Nursing” and, instead of “Nursing,” any other qualifier directly related to nursing, medicine, or healthcare in connection with the business and operations of HCN. The trademarks and service marks we use are central to our institutions’ brand identities overall and marketing efforts, including how prospective students identify them. Our institutions also own rights to internet domain names pertaining to their brand names and other unique descriptors. We and our institutions vigorously defend against infringement of intellectual property rights, including trademarks, service marks and copyrights. Seasonality and Quarterly Fluctuations We experience fluctuations in quarterly results and, therefore, the results in any quarter may not represent the results we may achieve in any subsequent quarter or full year. Operating results fluctuate as a result of seasonal or other variations in enrollments. For example, historically, across our institutions, our enrollments are higher in the fall term when students traditionally start their education. Our student population also varies as a result of new enrollments, graduations, student attrition, the success of our marketing programs, and other reasons that we cannot always anticipate. We expect quarterly fluctuations to continue. Available Information About Us APEI was incorporated in Delaware in 2002 as the successor to a Virginia corporation incorporated in 1991. Our website is www.apei.com. We make available, free of charge through our website, our Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K, and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act, as soon as reasonably practicable after they are electronically filed with, or furnished to, the SEC. Information on or available through our website is not incorporated by reference in this Annual Report, and any reference to our website is intended to be an inactive textual reference only. REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT We and our institutions are regulated by (i) accrediting agencies, (ii) state regulatory bodies, and (iii) the federal government through ED. APUS, RU, and HCN are approved to participate in TA programs administered by DoD and veterans’ education benefits programs administered by the VA and are therefore also subject to oversight by those agencies. Regulations, 20 standards, and policies of these agencies address the vast majority of our operations, including our educational programs, facilities, instructional and administrative staff, administrative procedures, marketing, recruiting, and financial operations and condition. We are also regulated in some cases by other federal agencies including the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, or CFPB, and Federal Trade Commission, or FTC. The postsecondary education regulatory environment is complex and continues to evolve. Changes in or new interpretations of law, regulations, standards, and policies could have material consequences for our institutions’ accreditation, authorization to operate in various states, permissible activities, receipt of funds under student financial assistance programs, and cost of doing business. The postsecondary education regulatory environment has also changed and may change in the future as a result of U.S. federal elections, changes in Presidential administrations and control of Congress, and legislative activity at the state level. Additional information regarding the regulatory and legislative environment and potential risks associated with it is available below and in the section entitled “Risk Factors” in this Annual Report. Accreditation Institutional Accreditation Accreditation is a voluntary, non-governmental process through which an institution submits to review its institution or programs based on the standards of the accrediting agency and the stated aims and purposes of the institution or program. Accrediting agencies establish criteria for accreditation, conduct peer-review evaluations, and publicly recognize those institutions or programs that meet the stated criteria and are considered accredited institutions or accredited programs. Accredited institutions and programs are subject to periodic review to assess institutional and program integrity, to encourage continued high performance and improvement, and to confirm that accreditation criteria continue to be satisfied. An institution or program that does not meet the criteria may have its accreditation limited, revoked, or not renewed. Accreditation at the institutional level by an accrediting agency recognized by ED is necessary to participate in Title IV programs and TA. To be recognized by ED, accrediting agencies must adopt specific standards and procedures. If one of our institutions’ institutional accreditors was to lose its recognition as an accrediting agency and the institution was unable to obtain recognition from another recognized accrediting agency, the institution could lose its eligibility to participate in Title IV programs and TA. The loss of ability of one of our institutions to participate in either Title IV programs or TA could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition. Additional information about each of our institutions’ accreditation is provided above in “Our Institutions and Operations – Our Institutions – Academics – Accreditation” and as follows: • APUS is institutionally accredited by HLC. APUS’s next reaffirmation of accreditation is scheduled for 2030-2031. HLC will conduct a focused visit at APUS in March 2024 after raising concerns regarding compliance with standards related to program development oversight and program assessment processes as a result of issues with course availability in one program. HLC’s focused visit will result in a written report addressing the topics of concern identified in the letter calling for the focused visit. The focused visit team report will include a recommendation to accept the report or may call for additional monitoring, sanction, show-cause order, or withdrawal of accreditation. Although APUS would have the opportunity to respond prior to any HLC action on the report, we cannot be sure that the HLC team will not identify deficiencies at APUS during the focused visit or call for negative accreditation-related action against APUS as a result. APUS has a Standard Pathway designation, having transitioned from the Open Pathway in 2023 because of HLC’s decision to conduct a focused visit. All institutions on the Standard Pathway must undergo a mid-cycle comprehensive evaluation. APUS is currently scheduled for its mid-cycle comprehensive evaluation site visit in 2025. • RU is institutionally accredited by HLC. RU’s next comprehensive evaluation for reaffirmation of accreditation is scheduled for May 2026. RU is accredited with the Open Pathway designation. • HCN is institutionally accredited by ABHES. In February 2021, ABHES granted HCN continued accreditation through February 2027 for all programs at all campuses. 21 ABHES annually reviews student achievement indicators, including retention rate, placement rate, and licensing and credentialing examination pass rate. Under ABHES policy, ABHES may withdraw accreditation at any time if it determines that an institution fails to demonstrate at least a 70% retention rate for each program, a 70% placement rate for each program, and a 70% pass rate on mandatory licensing and credentialing examinations or fails to meet the state-mandated results for credentialing or licensure. Alternatively, ABHES may in its discretion provide an opportunity for a program that is not meeting ABHES’ outcomes thresholds to come into compliance within a period of time specified by ABHES, and ABHES may extend the period for achieving compliance if a program demonstrates improvement over time or for other good cause. In prior years, several HCN programs at certain HCN campuses have failed to satisfy ABHES’s student achievement measures, and as a result ABHES has placed specific programs at certain campus locations on program-specific warning or outcomes reporting status and required action plans. As a result of retention rates being below the 70% benchmark for 2021-2022 reporting year, which was the second consecutive full reporting year, ABHES placed the PN programs at the Cincinnati, Cleveland, Columbus, and Dayton campuses on program-specific warning status in January 2023. Due to the Toledo PN and Akron ADN program retention rates falling below the 70% benchmark for 2021-2022 reporting year, which was the first full reporting year, ABHES imposed additional reporting requirements for these programs. As a result of failing to meet the threshold benchmark, ABHES required HCN to submit reports for each of these programs demonstrating their retention rate through the first three quarters of the 2022-2023 reporting year by May 2023. The reports submitted in response to this requirement demonstrated that the PN program at the Cincinnati, Cleveland, Columbus, and Dayton campuses and the ADN program at the Akron campus were above the 70% retention benchmark through the first three quarters of the 2022-2023 reporting year. As a result, the Cincinnati, Cleveland, Columbus, and Dayton PN programs were removed from program-specific warning status, and ABHES informed HCN that no additional information was required for the ADN program at the Akron campus. However, HCN reported that the retention rate for the PN program at the Toledo campus was below the 70% benchmark through the first three quarters of the 2022-2023 reporting year. Consequently, the Toledo PN program was placed on outcomes reporting status, and required to provide an additional report and action plan in October 2023, which HCN submitted. For the reporting year ended June 30, 2023, the PN program at the Cleveland, Columbus, Dayton, and Toledo campuses, as well as the ADN program at the Akron and Dayton campuses, were below the 70% benchmark for retention. As a result, ABHES has continued the Toledo PN program on outcomes reporting status, due to its retention rate falling below the 70% benchmark. ABHES is also requiring additional reporting for the Cleveland PN, Columbus PN, Dayton PN, Dayton ADN, and Akron ADN programs. In conjunction with these actions, ABHES is requiring HCN to submit reports for each of these programs demonstrating their retention rate through the first three quarters of the 2023-2024 reporting year by May 2024. If the Cleveland PN, Columbus PN, Dayton PN, Dayton ADN, and Akron ADN programs do not meet the 70% retention benchmark by the third quarter of the 2023-2024 reporting year, ABHES will likely place these programs on outcomes reporting status. If the Toledo PN program does not meet the 70% retention benchmark by the third quarter of the 2023-2024 reporting year, ABHES will likely place the program on program-specific warning status. For more information on the risks associated with these rates, refer to the risk factor in “Risk Factors” with the caption beginning “A failure of HCN to satisfy ABHES accreditation standards...”. • GSUSA is institutionally accredited by ACCET. GSUSA does not participate in the Title IV, TA, or VA education benefits programs. Institutional accreditation is an important attribute of our institutions. Colleges and universities depend, in part, on accreditation in evaluating transfers of credit and applications to graduate schools. Many institutions will only accept transfer credit from institutions with certain institutional accreditation. Students and sponsors of tuition reimbursement programs look to accreditation for quality assurance, and employers rely on institutions’ accredited status when evaluating a candidate’s credentials. Failure to maintain our institutional accreditations would result in the loss of eligibility to participate in Title IV programs and TA. Programmatic Accreditation and Professional Recognition In addition to institutional accreditation, our institutions have obtained programmatic accreditation or professional recognition for certain programs, as described more fully above in “Our Institutions and Operations – Our Institutions – Academics – Accreditation”. Among other standards and requirements, programmatic accreditors may utilize benchmarks for 22 student outcomes in the programs they accredit and may require the institution to address outcomes that fail to satisfy those benchmarks or may take other action based on such matters. If one of our institutions fails to satisfy the standards of these programmatic accrediting agencies or professional organizations for the relevant programs, the institutions could be subject to restrictions or could lose the programmatic accreditation or professional recognition for those programs, which could result in materially reduced student enrollments, prevent the institution from offering the programs in certain states where programmatic accreditation is required, or prevent our students from seeking and obtaining licensure or employment. The Accreditation Commission for Education in Nursing, or ACEN, accredits certain RU PN and ADN programs at certain RU locations. RU’s Illinois ADN program has been in candidacy status for initial accreditation with ACEN since July 2020. ACEN will not grant accreditation to a program on probationary status with the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation, or IDFPR, as RU’s Illinois ADN program is. The current candidacy is set to expire in July 2024. As further discussed in “State Authorization/Licensure – State Authorization/Licensure of Our Institutions” below, recently enacted legislation has resulted in the removal of all Illinois nursing programs, including RU’s Illinois ADN program, from probationary status for a period of three years. However, there were several bills introduced in the Illinois legislature in February 2024 seeking to modify this change in legislation. Furthermore, there can be no assurance that the removal from probationary status of RU’s Illinois ADN program will be viewed favorably by ACEN or another nursing program accreditor or would result in RU’s Illinois ADN program obtaining ACEN accreditation following the February 2024 site visit. RU’s Bloomington, Minnesota ADN program has been subject to adverse action and heightened scrutiny from ACEN, which is its programmatic accreditor, and other regulators as a result of continued failure to meet applicable accreditor and regulatory requirements. As more fully discussed in the Risk Factor with the caption beginning “RU’s planned closure of its Bloomington, Minnesota ADN program…” in December 2023, RU informed the Minnesota Board of Nursing, or MBN, that it intends to voluntarily close the Bloomington, Minnesota ADN program on June 15, 2024. The MBN voted to approve the voluntary closure of the Bloomington, Minnesota ADN program at its February 1, 2024 meeting. Due to previous self-imposed enrollment caps and the pause on new enrollments, enrollment in this program currently represents less than 2% of RU’s current total enrollment. For all students enrolled in the Bloomington, Minnesota ADN program graduating after June 2024, their enrollment record will be transferred to RU’s St. Cloud, Minnesota ADN program. However, there can be no assurance that any or all remaining students in the program will transfer to the St. Cloud campus. In September 2022, ACEN granted RU’s ADN and PN programs in Moorhead, Minnesota and RU’s ADN program in Overland Park, Kansas continued accreditation with conditions, in each case because the program experienced first-time NCLEX pass rates below ACEN’s required threshold. For the two Moorhead, Minnesota programs, ACEN also identified evidence of noncompliance with respect to analysis and use of assessment data in program decision-making. The ADN programs have two years, and the PN program has 18 months, from the date the conditions were imposed, to demonstrate compliance with all criteria related to the standard for which the programs were found to be in noncompliance, though ACEN does not necessarily have to take action on any particular timetable. If compliance is not achieved by the end of the monitoring period, ACEN may deny continuing accreditation absent good cause. In February 2024, RU’s Moorhead, Minnesota PN program submitted to ACEN a follow-up report and an application for continuing accreditation for good cause. If ACEN determines areas of non-compliance remain, ACEN could withdraw the PN program’s accreditation or grant it continuing accreditation for good cause. RU’s Moorhead, Minnesota PN program is currently approved with the MBN, but first-time NCLEX pass rates have been below the standard for three consecutive years. RU expects that the MBN will place RU’s Moorhead, Minnesota PN program on conditional approval status and issue a corrective action order following the MBN’s April 2024 Board meeting. State Authorization/Licensure Our institutions are subject to regulation by the states in which they operate. The level of oversight varies from state to state, and such regulations change frequently. State laws typically establish standards for instruction, faculty qualifications, administrative procedures, marketing, recruiting, financial operations, and other operational matters. Some states prescribe regulations related to an institution’s financial condition, and some states require the posting of surety bonds. State laws and regulations may affect our institutions’ ability to offer educational programs, open locations, and award degrees. If one of our institutions fails to comply with a state’s requirements, it may lose its state licensure or authorization, which would result in the institution’s inability to enroll students in that state and could result in the institution’s inability to receive Title IV program funds and TA funds, at least for students in that state. Some states assert authority to regulate an institution if its educational programs are offered to residents of those states, regardless of whether the institution maintains a physical presence in the state. The growth of online education has led and may further lead to new laws and regulations and new interpretations of existing laws and regulations. New laws, regulations, or 23 interpretations, including with respect to whether our institutions’ activities constitute a physical presence or otherwise may require authorization or licensure, could increase our cost of doing business and affect our ability to recruit students in particular states, which could negatively affect enrollments and revenue and have a material adverse effect on our business. Changes in our business activities could lead states that do not currently require our institutions to be authorized to require such authorization. The extent of this increase in regulatory obligations, and the associated costs and significance, are not known at this time. Furthermore, in some states it may take a significant amount of time to meet the applicable regulatory requirements with respect to a new program initiative, or we may not be able to do so at all. The State Authorization Reciprocity Agreement, or SARA, is a voluntary agreement among member states (all states except California), districts, and territories that establishes national standards for interstate offering of postsecondary distance education and is intended to make it easier for students to take online courses offered by institutions based in another jurisdiction. SARA requires member jurisdictions to approve institutions in their jurisdiction to participate in SARA, based upon institutional accreditation and financial stability, and to resolve student complaints. Applications must be renewed annually. SARA does not cover, or limits its coverage related to, certain activities. As a result, an institution may still be required to obtain state authorization from, for example, agencies, or boards responsible for professional licensure. For information on our institutions’ status under SARA, please refer to “State Authorization/Licensure of Our Institutions” in this Annual Report. Many states also have specific requirements that an individual must satisfy in order to be licensed as a professional in a specified field. Students’ success in obtaining licensure typically depends on numerous factors, including: individual merits of the graduate; whether the institution and the program were approved by the state in which the graduate seeks licensure or by a professional association; whether the program meets all state requirements for professional licensure; and the accreditation of the institution and the specific program. Federal Requirements for State Authorization/Licensure “Home” State Authorization ED regulations specify how an institution may demonstrate, as required by ED, that it is authorized to offer postsecondary education programs by the state(s) where it is located, including the state where its main campus is located, which we refer to as its “home” state, and that the home state otherwise satisfies ED requirements. If ED determines that an institution does not have the required state approval, the institution will be ineligible to participate in Title IV programs. If one of our institutions were to lose its ability to participate in Title IV programs in connection with home state authorization requirements, it would also lose its ability to participate in TA and VA, be unable to operate in the state, grant credentials, and lose institutional accreditation. State Authorization of Online Education ED regulations require that an institution that offers postsecondary education through distance education to students located in a state in which the institution is not physically located or in which the institution is otherwise subject to the state’s jurisdiction must meet the state’s requirements to be legally offering postsecondary distance education in that state or must be covered by a state authorization reciprocity agreement, like SARA. ED regulations also now specify the required methodology for determining the state in which a student is located for purposes of satisfying state authorization requirements for distance education courses and require an institution to disclose certain information related to whether programs leading to professional licensure meet applicable state requirements, regardless of program modality. State Authorization and Professional Licensure Beginning July 1, 2024, new ED regulations will require institutions that offer postsecondary education programs leading to employment in an occupation that requires licensure or certification to meet certain additional requirements in order for those programs to maintain eligibility to participate in Title IV programs. In each state in which the institution is located, in which students enrolled in distance education are located, or where a student enrolled after July 1, 2024 attests that they intend to seek employment, the program must: (1) meet all applicable federal or state agency accreditation or pre-accreditation requirements, including as a condition of employment in the occupation for which the program prepares the students; (2) satisfy the applicable state education requirements for professional licensure or certification so that a student seeking employment may qualify to take any licensure or certification exam needed to practice or find employment in the state; and (3) comply with all applicable state laws related to closure. 24 State Authorization/Licensure of Our Institutions APUS is authorized to enroll students from each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia. APUS is headquartered in Charles Town, West Virginia, and is authorized to offer its programs by the West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission, or WVHEPC. Under current law, if APUS were to lose its accreditation by HLC, WVHEPC may suspend, withdraw, or revoke APUS’s authorization. Failure to comply with WVHEPC requirements could result in APUS losing its authorization from WVHEPC, its accreditation by HLC, its eligibility to participate in Title IV programs and TA, or its ability to offer certain programs, any of which could force APUS to cease operations. APUS participates in SARA. APUS also has obtained authorization to operate in California, which is the only state that is a non-SARA jurisdiction. RU is headquartered in Bloomington, Minnesota, and has 22 campuses across Florida, Illinois, Kansas, Minnesota, North Dakota, and Wisconsin. HCN is headquartered in Westerville, Ohio, and has six campuses in Ohio, one in Indiana, and one in Michigan. RU and HCN have obtained from the relevant state postsecondary education agencies the requisite authorizations, approvals, or registrations for the states in which they have campuses. In addition, the nursing education programs offered by RU and HCN are approved by the relevant state boards of nursing. RU and HCN participate in SARA and RU has also obtained authorization to operate in California, which is the only state that is a non-SARA jurisdiction. HCN does not offer online programs in California. To maintain regulatory approval from the state board of nursing or equivalent body in the states that we operate, an educational program must maintain a certain pass rate on the relevant licensure exam, as defined by the state. If a program does not attain this pass rate, the program may face various consequences, including development and implementation of a plan of corrective action, issuance of a corrective order, or revocation of approval pursuant to an adjudication proceeding. In Indiana, a program that is under initial accreditation may not be granted full accreditation if the program’s pass rate is lower than one standard deviation below the average national pass rate. In addition, if the program’s pass rate is lower than one standard deviation below the average national pass rate for three consecutive years, the program may be subject to additional oversight or a change in accreditation status. A number of programs at certain RU campuses and in certain states, including its Bloomington and Moorhead, Minnesota, Fort Myers, Florida, Ocala, Florida, Tampa/Brandon, Florida, and Illinois and Kansas ADN programs and its Moorhead, Minnesota PN program, as well as HCN’s Ohio ADN program, have not met state-established first-time NCLEX benchmarks for consecutive years. We believe that low pass rates may be the result of a number of factors, including, without limitation, the academic preparedness of our students, curriculum gaps, changes in the mode of course delivery including the use of virtual courses, testing failures and inconsistencies, imbalances in enrollment and resources, and changes in admission standards. For more information, please refer to the Risk Factor that begins with the caption “Failure to improve certain of our programs’ NCLEX pass rates...” A stipulation and consent order with the MBN required RU’s Bloomington, Minnesota ADN program to, among other things, reach applicable NCLEX pass rate standards by the end of 2023 and maintain a specified student to faculty ratio in 2023, with a potential penalty up to and including withdrawal of program approval. The Bloomington, Minnesota ADN program did not reach the applicable NCLEX pass rates by the end of 2023. As a result, on December 29, 2023, RU informed the MBN that it intended to voluntarily close the Bloomington, Minnesota ADN program on June 15, 2024. The MBN approved the voluntary closure of the Bloomington, Minnesota ADN program at its February 1, 2024 meeting. For all students enrolled in the Bloomington, Minnesota ADN program graduating after June 2024, their enrollment record will be transferred to RU’s St. Cloud, Minnesota ADN. However, there can be no assurance that any or all remaining students in the program will transfer to the St. Cloud campus. In February 2022, RU’s Illinois ADN program was placed on probationary status by the IDFPR. Therefore, RU is required to temporarily reduce admitted students in the program by 25% and has two years to demonstrate evidence of implementing strategies to correct deficiencies and satisfy the required NCLEX pass rate. The requirement provided that after two years if the pass rate does not satisfy the required standard, the program will be reevaluated by the IDFPR for a determination as to whether the program will be allowed to continue on probation or whether it should be disapproved. An Illinois statute also required nursing programs to have achieved accreditation by the end of 2022 in order to meet state approval requirements. RU’s Illinois ADN program is currently in candidacy status with ACEN and was deemed by IDFPR to meet the state’s accreditation requirement based on such candidacy status, but actual accreditation has not yet been granted. The current candidacy status is set to expire in July 2024. Although the IDFPR has indicated that candidacy status satisfies this requirement, the IDFPR could change its position. The State of Illinois enacted legislation in August 2023, which took effect on January 1, 2024, that we believe could positively impact RU’s Illinois ADN program by providing the program with additional time to improve NCLEX pass rates. 25 The legislation changed the Illinois NCLEX pass rate requirements from a one-year measurement based on first attempts only to a three-year average that includes all test attempts and temporarily removed all nursing programs, including RU’s Illinois ADN program, from probationary status for a period of three years. The IDFPR’s Board of Nursing now publicly lists RU as approved with no reference to probation. However, there can be no assurance that the IDFPR’s Board of Nursing will not seek to impose different or additional requirements in connection with this change in legislation or that additional legislation will not be enacted that imposes new requirements that are more restrictive than what is currently in place. Furthermore, there can be no assurance that the resulting removal from probationary status of RU’s Illinois ADN program may be viewed favorably by ACEN or another nursing program accreditor and may result in RU’s Illinois ADN program obtaining ACEN accreditation following a site visit in February 2024. Kansas regulations were amended, effective January 2022, to increase the threshold first-time pass rate to 80% and change corrective actions for noncompliance. In April 2022, RU’s Kansas ADN program was issued a notice of concern by the Kansas Board of Nursing, or KBN, requiring RU to submit to the KBN a plan of action to improve its NCLEX pass rates. The Kansas ADN program has until April 2024 to increase its NCLEX pass rate to the regulatory standard. RU’s Kansas ADN program’s first-time pass rate exceeded the threshold pass rate for 2023. In February 2023, the Florida Board of Nursing, or FBN, placed RU’s Fort Myers, Florida ADN program on probation until its pass rate reaches the applicable threshold for a calendar year. RU is required to disclose this status to active and prospective students. If the program fails to achieve the required NCLEX pass rate within two years following placement on probation, FBN may extend the program’s status for a year if the program is demonstrating progress toward achievement. However, absent further extension or achievement of the required rate by the end of the extension, Florida law provides that FBN shall terminate the program. In February 2024, FBN also placed RU’s Ocala, Florida and Tampa/Brandon, Florida ADN programs on probation – a status that must be disclosed to active and prospective students – until the programs’ pass rates reach the applicable threshold for a calendar year. RU was required to present an action plan to FBN on February 7, 2024, detailing benchmarks to measure progress toward achieving the required NCLEX pass rate. In January 2024, legislation that would significantly overhaul the regulation of Florida nursing programs in ways that could materially adversely impact RU’s Florida ADN and PN programs was introduced in the Florida senate, but at this time there can be no assurance that the legislation will be enacted as drafted or at all. Rasmussen University had its annual review in January 2024, with the Florida Commission for Independent Education, or FCIE, where it waived a decision. Rasmussen is expected to appear on the May 2024, agenda where FCIE will review Florida campus NCLEX scores and campus income statements. Based on FCIE review, the FCIE may place Rasmussen on a provisional license due to recent NCLEX pass rates and campus income statements. If placed on provisional status, the Florida program would have one year to increase its NCLEX scores as well as improve its financials. If Rasmussen is unable to improve NCLEX scores and financials over time, this situation could have an adverse impact on their ability to enroll students and eventually our ability to continue offering our programs in Florida. HCN’s ADN program has been on provisional approval status in Ohio since March 2017 due to not meeting the first-time pass rate standard for five consecutive years. The Ohio Board of Nursing, or OBN, will consider restoring a program to full approval status if the program meets the first-time pass rate standard for at least two consecutive years. In January 2023, OBN placed HCN’s PN program on provisional approval for a period of 18 months due to two self-reported instances of noncompliance with faculty credential and program records requirements. As a result, HCN must submit to OBN progress reports evidencing that it meets and maintains nursing program requirements. Additionally, HCN will host a site visit from OBN in 2024 after which OBN may reconsider the provisional approval status. If a program on provisional approval fails to meet OBN requirements at the end of the time period established for provisional approval, in this case as of June 2024, OBN may propose to continue provisional approval for a set time period or may propose to withdraw approval. RU and HCN have been implementing changes to their ADN programs, including programmatic certification improvement plans at RU, and curriculum, academic achievement, and course retake policy changes at HCN, in order to help prepare students and graduates for successful performance on the NCLEX exam. However, there is no assurance that these changes will be successful in the required time periods or will not have negative effects on RU’s or HCN’s enrollment. If RU and HCN are unable to improve NCLEX scores over time, and in some cases by the deadlines imposed on their programs at certain campuses and in certain states as discussed above, this situation could have an adverse impact on their ability to enroll students and eventually our ability to continue offering the ADN programs at the applicable campuses. Failure to comply with state authorization or licensure requirements has impacted and could in the future restrict our institutions’ ability to recruit or enroll students or result in other sanctions, including fines and penalties. New laws, regulations, interpretations, or changed circumstances related to our institutions’ educational programs could increase our cost of doing business and affect our ability to recruit students and offer programs in particular states, which could, in turn, adversely affect 26 our institutions’ enrollments and revenue and have a material effect on our business. Additional information regarding the current impacts and potential risks associated with our NCLEX pass rates is provided in the “Risk Factors” section of this Annual Report. Student Financing Sources and Related Regulations/Requirements Our students finance their education through a combination of Title IV programs, TA, education benefits administered by the VA, private loans, corporate reimbursement programs, individual resources, and institutional grants, and in the case of HCN, an extended payment plan option. Participation in federal student aid programs, including those administered by the DoD and VA, and the extended payment plan option at HCN, adds to the regulation of our operations. Department of Education The Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended, or the HEA, and related ED regulations subject us to significant scrutiny in the form of numerous standards we must satisfy in order to participate in and administer Title IV programs. The federal government provides support for postsecondary education through the Title IV programs in the form of grants and loans to eligible students who can use those funds to enroll in an eligible educational program at any institution that has been certified by ED. An institution will be certified to participate in the Title IV programs only if, among other things, it enters into a written program participation agreement, or PPA, with ED, which conditions participation in Title IV programs upon compliance with ED regulations and any additional conditions specified in the PPA. ED recently released a final rule modifying and expanding the current financial responsibility, administrative capability, and certification regulations, which takes effect July 1, 2024. Under the modified regulations, institutions will be required to meet additional financial responsibility criteria and must report certain “financial responsibility” events to ED. Such events include certain mandatory and discretionary triggers that capture financial circumstances that may not be reflected in an institution’s financial statements, including instances where an institution faces a potential loss of Title IV funding. Under the new rule, if ED determines that an institution has 90/10 Rule violations, high borrower default rates, or certain pending legal and administrative actions, it will require the institution to post “financial protection”, such as a letter of credit. ED may also require the institution to post financial protection if it determines that certain discretionary triggers may have an adverse effect on the financial condition of the institution, such as pending accrediting agency or government agency actions, high annual dropout rates, or pending borrower defense claims. If ED requires financial protection as a result of more than one mandatory or discretionary trigger, ED will require separate financial protection for each individual trigger. In addition to financial protection, ED may require institutions that fail to meet these financial responsibility criteria to participate in Title IV programs under a provisional certification. ED may also impose additional requirements on the institution’s participation in Title IV programs, such as restrictions on enrollment, addition of new programs, or acquisitions. Higher Education Act The HEA must be periodically reauthorized by Congress and each Title IV program must be funded through appropriations acts on an annual basis. The most recent comprehensive reauthorization occurred in 2008 when Congress reauthorized most HEA programs through the 2014 federal fiscal year. The reauthorization has been temporarily extended in the years that have followed. Congress previously considered comprehensive legislation to reauthorize the HEA, including proposals from Republicans and Democrats, referred to as the Student Aid Improvement Act and the College Affordability Act, respectively, and Congress could consider such legislation again in the future. We cannot predict whether, in what form, or when, HEA reauthorization legislation will be enacted. Modifications to the HEA could occur as part of reauthorization, which could require us to modify our business practices and increase administrative costs, thereby negatively impacting our results of operations. Types of Title IV Financial Aid Programs . Title IV program aid is primarily awarded to students on the basis of financial need, generally defined as the difference between the cost of attending an institution and the amount a student can reasonably contribute. Our students receive grants and loans to fund their education under several Title IV programs, of which the two largest are Direct Loans and Pell Grants. Some of our students may also be eligible for other Title IV grant programs, such as the Federal Supplemental Education Opportunity Grant. The Title IV programs are subject to Congressional action in terms of appropriations and other legislation that may affect funding levels, student eligibility, and other requirements. For example, the Pell Grant program could be subject to cuts or 27 changes in the future, and cuts in ED’s administrative budget could lead to delays in student eligibility determinations and delays in origination and processing of federal student loans. Regulation of Title IV Financial Aid Programs To be eligible and certified to participate in Title IV programs, an institution must be accredited by an accrediting body recognized by ED, must be authorized to operate by the appropriate regulatory authority in each state where the institution maintains a physical presence, and must comply with specific standards and procedures set forth in the HEA and the regulations issued thereunder by ED. ED periodically revises its regulations and changes its interpretations of existing laws and regulations. Accrediting agencies and state education agencies also have responsibilities for overseeing institutional compliance with certain Title IV program requirements. For these reasons, we cannot predict with certainty how Title IV program requirements will be applied in all circumstances. Key provisions relating to institutional participation in Title IV and the processing of Title IV aid that could adversely affect us include the following: Eligibility and Certification Procedures. An institution must apply periodically to ED for continued certification to participate in Title IV programs. Recertification generally is required every six years, but may be required earlier, including when an institution undergoes a change in ownership resulting in a change of control. An institution may come under review when it expands its activities in certain ways, such as opening an additional location, adding a new program, or, in certain cases, when it modifies academic credentials that it offers. New ED regulations, effective July 1, 2024, will implement supplementary performance measures that ED will consider when determining whether to certify or condition an institution’s participation in Title IV programs. Among other requirements, ED may consider amounts spent on instruction and instructional activities, academic support, and support services, compared to the amounts spent on recruiting activities, advertising, and other pre-enrollment expenditures. In addition, if a program is designed to meet educational requirements for a specific professional license or certification that is required for employment in an occupation, and the institution is required by an accrediting agency or state to report passage rates for the licensure exam for the program, ED may consider such passage rates. ED may place an institution on provisional certification status if ED finds that the institution does not fully satisfy all Title IV requirements and in certain other circumstances, such as when an institution undergoes a change in ownership resulting in a change of control. During a period of provisional certification, the institution must comply with any additional conditions imposed by ED. In addition, ED may more closely review a provisionally certified institution if it applies for approval to open a new location, add an educational program, acquire another school, or make any other significant change. If ED determines that a provisionally certified institution is unable to meet its responsibilities, it may seek to revoke the institution’s certification to participate in Title IV programs with fewer due process protections than if it were fully certified. In June 2020, APUS timely applied for recertification to participate in Title IV programs. ED subsequently notified APUS that it had completed its review of APUS’s application and had granted APUS provisional certification until June 30, 2023, because APUS was subject to an open program review at the time of renewal. That program review was closed in January 2021 with no findings, penalties, or further action required. APUS applied for recertification in March 2023. APUS’s recertification application is still pending, and APUS remains on provisional certification with ED . In July 2023, ED began a program review of APUS’s administration of Title IV programs during the 2021-2022 and 2022-2023 award years, which includes, among other things, a review of compliance with the 90/10 Rule. APUS has not yet received a program review report from ED. Accordingly, at this time, we cannot predict the outcome of the APUS program review, when it will be completed, whether there will be any adverse findings in the resulting program review report, what findings there may be related to 90/10 Rule compliance, if any, or whether ED will place any liability or other limitations on APUS as a result of the review. In July 2021, in connection with RU’s March 2019 change in ownership that preceded our acquisition of RU, ED imposed certain temporary growth restrictions on RU, including limitations on new programs and locations and a cap on enrollments of students who participate in Title IV programs. Additionally, ED required RU to submit periodic financial and enrollment reports and a financial responsibility letter of credit. In connection with the Rasmussen Acquisition, RU timely submitted a change in ownership and control application to ED seeking approval to participate in the Title IV programs under our ownership and, effective October 2021, ED and RU entered into a Temporary Provisional Program Participation Agreement, or TPPPA, that allowed RU to continue disbursing Title IV funds while ED reviewed the change in ownership application. The TPPPA continued the restrictions that ED imposed as a result of the March 2019 change in ownership. In 28 August 2023, ED notified RU that it had approved RU’s continued participation in the Title IV programs under APEI ownership under a Provisional Program Participation Agreement, or PPPA. The PPPA continues to impose certain growth restrictions on RU that were included in the TPPPA, including limitations on new programs and locations and the enrollment of students that participate in Title IV programs. ED continues the prior requirement that RU submit periodic financial and Title IV enrollment reports. The PPPA also imposes new reporting requirements related to accrediting agency actions, government actions, class actions, and student complaints. The PPPA specifies that after ED reviews and accepts financial statements and compliance audits for one complete fiscal year of RU’s Title IV participation under APEI’s ownership, RU may seek approval for new programs that replace current programs. Although one complete fiscal year of RU’s Title IV participation under APEI’s ownership has passed, and we believe that we may now seek approval for new programs that replace current programs, we have not yet confirmed with ED that it has accepted the financial statements and compliance audits for such purpose. The PPPA also specifies that after ED reviews and accepts financial statements and compliance audits that cover the second complete fiscal year of RU’s Title IV participation under our ownership, RU must seek pre-approval for new locations, new programs that are not replacing current programs, and other changes. For the second and third fiscal years, RU is also subject to enrollment growth limitations, after which RU can request ED that release RU from further enrollment restrictions. The PPPA no longer requires RU to post the financial responsibility letter of credit that ED had imposed based on the 2019 change in ownership and control of RU, although this letter of credit has not yet been released. We believe we have met all obligations for the release of the letter of credit. In June 2021, HCN timely applied for recertification to participate in Title IV programs. ED subsequently notified HCN that it had been granted Provisional Certification for all Title IV programs until September 30, 2023. ED granted approval on a Provisional basis because HCN was subject to an open program review at the time of recertification. As described in “Compliance with Regulatory Standards and Effect of Regulatory Violations – Compliance Reviews,” in July 2022, HCN received a final program review determination from ED, and in September 2022, ED notified HCN that it had closed the program review and no further action was required though the provisional designation remained. In June 2023, HCN again timely applied for recertification. ED subsequently notified HCN that it had been granted non-provisional participation in all Title IV programs effective August 15, 2023 and expiring June 30, 2026. Co-Signature Requirements. A participating institution must sign a Program Participation Agreement with ED as a condition to participation in Title IV programs. New regulations, effective July 1, 2024, codify a current ED policy requiring signatures from corporations or other legal entities that have, or could have, a direct or indirect effect on the institution’s financial responsibility. Under the new regulations, entities with a direct or indirect ownership interest and the power to exercise control over the institution must co-sign the Program Participation Agreement. Co-signers agree that they are jointly and severally liable for the participating institution’s Title IV liabilities. Administrative Capability. ED regulations specify extensive criteria that an institution must satisfy to establish that it has the requisite administrative capability to participate in Title IV programs. These criteria relate to, among other things, institutional staffing, operational standards such as procedures for disbursing and safeguarding Title IV program funds, timely submission of accurate reports to ED, referring to ED’s Office of Inspector General, or ED OIG, credible information that a student or employees with Title IV responsibilities may have engaged in fraud or illegal conduct in connection with Title IV program administration, and various other procedural matters. As described above, due to new regulations, effective July 1, 2024, ED may find that an institution has failed the administrative capability requirements if the institution does not provide adequate financial aid counseling or career services, has been subject to a negative action by a state or federal agency, court, or accreditor, fails to verify high school diplomas, or does not timely place students in geographically accessible clinical or externship opportunities. If an institution fails to satisfy any of the administrative capability requirements, ED may require the repayment of Title IV program funds, transfer the institution from the “advance” system of payment of Title IV program funds to heightened cash monitoring status, or to the “reimbursement” method of payment, place the institution on provisional certification status, or commence a proceeding to impose a fine or to limit, suspend, or terminate the participation of the institution in Title IV programs. Financial Responsibility. The HEA and ED regulations establish extensive standards of financial responsibility that institutions must satisfy in order to participate in Title IV programs. These standards generally require that an institution provide the services described in its official publications and statements, properly administer Title IV programs in which it participates, and meet all of its financial obligations, including making required refunds and any repayments to ED. ED evaluates institutions on an annual basis for compliance with specified financial responsibility standards, including a complex formula based on line items from the institution’s audited financial statements. The formula focuses on three financial ratios: (1) equity ratio (which measures the institution’s capital resources, financial viability, and ability to borrow); (2) primary reserve ratio (which measures the institution’s viability and liquidity); and (3) net income ratio (which measures the institution’s profitability or ability to operate within its means). Generally, an institution’s financial ratios must yield a 29 composite score of at least 1.5 for the institution to be deemed financially responsible. A composite score between 1.0 and 1.4 is considered by ED to be in the “zone.” An institution in the “zone” may still participate in the Title IV programs as a financially responsible institution through the “zone alternative” or the “financial protection alternative” as set forth in ED regulations. Under the zone alternative, an institution: must request and receive funds under the heightened cash monitoring or reimbursement payment methods (resulting in a delayed method of cash funding for Title IV aid); may be required to provide additional information to ED upon request (e.g., early submission of financial statement and compliance audit, information about current operations and future plans); must require its auditor to express an opinion regarding compliance with zone alternative requirements; and must provide timely information to ED regarding certain oversight and financial events. Under the financial protection alternative, the institution must provide financial protection of at least 50% of the Title IV funding that it received during its most recently completed fiscal year. ED may also apply the financial responsibility standards to other entities under common ownership with an eligible institution. At the request of ED, for purposes of evaluating the financial responsibility of our institutions, including the composite score calculation, we supply consolidated financial statements to ED. Because ED does not review each of our institution’s financial statements separately, a determination by ED that our consolidated financial statements do not satisfy the “financial responsibility” requirements could cause all of our institutions to lose access to Title IV program funding or result in other penalties or conditions on continued participation. Although our consolidated composite score is expected to be above 1.5 at our next financial responsibility test, there is no assurance that it will remain at 1.5 or above in the future or that if it falls in the “zone” in the future that we will be able to demonstrate financial responsibility. On March 4, 2024, ED notified us that in calculating our composite score for the fiscal year-ended December 31, 2022, it excluded our deferred tax assets from its calculation of our assets. As a result, ED calculated that we had a 2022 consolidated composite score of 1.1 and our institutions were therefore in the “zone.” We disagree with ED’s calculation and conclusion and intend to submit a timely response to ED supporting our position that our deferred tax assets should not be excluded from the calculation and that our composite score was above 1.5 for the year-ended December 31, 2022. However, there can be no assurance that ED will agree with our position. If ED does not accept our position, we intend to comply with the zone alternative requirements. Under the zone alternative requirements, we would be required to: (i) make Title IV disbursements to eligible students and parents under the heightened cash monitoring payment method, or HCM1, pursuant to which we would be required to first make disbursements to eligible students and parents and pay any credit balances before we request or receive funds from ED for the amount of those disbursements; (ii) notify ED of certain events, such as an adverse action taken by any of our institution’s accreditors or state authorizing agencies; (iii) provide regular reports to ED relating to our institution’s current operations and future plans; and (iv) require our auditors to express an opinion on our compliance with the requirements under the zone alternative. Institutions with composite scores below 1.5 do not qualify for approval from SARA unless, in the case of scores above 1.0, the home state exercises its discretion to consider additional financial information. Eligibility for SARA is determined separately for each of our institutions by the SARA portal agency in the institution’s home state. If the respective SARA portal agency for APUS, RU, or HCN were not to renew the institution’s approval due to a low composite score, we would need to obtain approval or exemptions in states in which the affected institution offers distance education programs or discontinue the affected institution’s offerings to students in such states. In addition, some states have adopted financial standards that are similar to ED’s composite score, which means an affected institution may be unable to obtain licensure in that state if it were to lose SARA participation. And, because composite scores are viewed as a measure of financial responsibility, other regulators or accreditors could consider a composite score that is in “zone” negatively, which could have an impact on their interactions with us and what they permit us to do. As of September 30, 2020, prior to the Rasmussen Acquisition, RU had a composite score equal to 1.4. RU elected to post a letter of credit with ED totaling $23.1 million, which represented 10% of the Title IV program funds received by RU during its then most recently completed fiscal year. Upon the closing of the Rasmussen Acquisition, RU was required to fund this letter of credit using a restricted deposit account that required a deposit of 105%, or $24.2 million, to secure the RU letter of credit. Under the TPPPA for RU described above, ED continued to require a letter of credit at least until ED reviews and accepts financial statements and compliance audits that cover one complete fiscal year of RU’s Title IV participation under APEI’s ownership. The PPPA no longer requires RU to post the financial responsibility letter of credit that ED had imposed based on the 2019 change in ownership and control of RU, although this letter of credit has not yet been released. We believe we have met all obligations for the release of the letter of credit, but we understand from communications with ED that financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2022 remain under review by ED. Additionally, RU continues to be required to make Title IV disbursements to eligible students and parents under HCM1. In September 2019, ED published modifications to its financial responsibility standards that took effect July 1, 2020. We refer to these regulations as the 2019 Borrower Defense Regulations. The 2019 Borrower Defense Regulations identify 30 certain conditions or other triggering events that have or may have an adverse material effect on the institution’s financial condition, in response to which ED would or could require that the institution submit some form of financial protection, such as a letter of credit, to ED. Triggering events are characterized as either mandatory or discretionary. ED will consider an institution unable to meet its financial or administrative obligations if an institution experiences a mandatory triggering event. ED may consider an institution not to be financially responsible if an institution experiences a discretionary triggering event. For each triggering event, to demonstrate that the institution remains financially responsible, the institution may submit evidence that the triggering event has been resolved, that the institution has insurance that will cover part or all of the debt or liabilities, or that the triggering event has not or will not have a material adverse effect on the institution. If ED determines that one of our institutions is not financially responsible because of one or more triggering events, the institution would be required to provide an irrevocable letter of credit equal to at least 10% of the amount of federal student financial aid funds received by the institution for the past year. In October 2023, ED published modifications to its financial responsibility standards that take effect on July 1, 2024. These revised standards include, among other requirements, an expanded list of conditions or other triggering events for which ED could require financial protection, such as a letter of credit. In addition, if ED requires financial protection as a result of more than one mandatory or discretionary trigger, it will require separate financial protection for each individual trigger. The American Rescue Plan Act, or ARPA, which was enacted in March 2021, modifies the HEA’s 90/10 Rule to require that a for-profit institution derive not less than 10 percent of its revenue from sources other than “federal education assistance funds”. ED published final regulations in October 2022 that address ARPA’s modifications to the 90/10 Rule. The new regulations provide that for fiscal years beginning on or after January 1, 2023, and therefore for our institutions the year ended December 31, 2023, federal funds used to calculate the “90%” side of the ratio include Title IV funds and any other educational assistance funds provided by a federal agency directly to an institution or a student, including the federal portion of any grant funds provided by or administered by a non-federal agency, except for non-Title IV federal funds provided directly to a student to cover expenses other than tuition, fees, and other institutional charges. ED confirmed that the 90/10 Rule would no longer permit institutions to count federal aid for veterans and service members as part of the “10%” side of the ratio. As a result, effective January 1, 2023, TA and VA benefits are included in the “90%” side of the ratio, and our institutions’ 90/10 Rule percentages increased, particularly at APUS. In March 2021, the Army launched ArmyIgnitED, to replace GoArmyED as its system for processing the Army’s TA funds for participating institutions. Issues related to the launch of ArmyIgnitED resulted in cash payments from the Army to APUS that were expected in 2021 and 2022 to be received in 2023, which, together with the change to the 90/10 Rule, enrollment growth among service members as compared to declines in students who use non-federal educational assistance funds and the delayed receipt of funds have caused and may continue to cause, APUS’s 90/10 Rule percentage to increase, making it more difficult to satisfy the 90/10 Rule. While each of our institutions was in compliance with the 90/10 Rule for 2023, with APUS’s relevant percentage for 2023 being 89%, there can be no assurance that we will continue to be able to comply in future years, particularly at APUS. See the Risk Factor captioned “If one or more of our institutions does not comply with the 90/10 Rule, it or they will lose eligibility to participate in federal student financial aid programs” for more information. The final regulations also include other requirements, including: institutions must request and disburse Title IV funds before the end of the fiscal year (or, for institutions operating under the reimbursement method or the heightened cash monitoring method, make disbursements by the end of the fiscal year and report the funds in the “90%” side of the ratio for that fiscal year); institutions are restricted in when and how they can count institutional loans and alternative financing arrangements as non-federal revenue; institutions may, under certain circumstances, include non-federal revenue from non-Title IV programs in their 90/10 calculation; and institutions must notify ED and students in a timely manner if they fail the 90/10 Rule. The “90/10 Rule.” Under the so-called “90/10 Rule”, a for-profit institution is prohibited from deriving more than 90% of its revenue (as computed by ED) on a cash accounting basis (except for certain institutional loans) from Title IV programs for any fiscal year. If an institution fails to satisfy the 90/10 Rule for any fiscal year, the institution is placed on provisional status for two fiscal years. An institution that fails to satisfy the rule for two consecutive fiscal years becomes ineligible to participate in Title IV programs for at least two fiscal years and is required to demonstrate compliance with Title IV eligibility and certification requirements for at least two additional fiscal years prior to resuming Title IV program participation. Such institution would also lose the ability to participate in TA because DoD requires institutions to participate in the Title IV programs in order to participate in TA. Ineligibility of any one or more of our institutions to participate in Title IV programs and TA would have a material adverse effect on our enrollments, revenue, results of operations, and cash flows. See the Risk Factor with the caption beginning “If one or more of our institutions does not comply…” for more information. Using the applicable 90/10 formula, the following table contains the percentage of cash-basis revenue earned from Title IV program funds: 31 2021 2022 2023 APUS 34% 31% 89% RU 75% 74% 77% HCN 81% 80% 84% Incentive Payment Rule. An institution participating in Title IV programs may not provide any commission, bonus or other incentive payment to any person or entity engaged in any student recruitment, admissions, or financial aid awarding activity based directly or indirectly on success in securing enrollments or federal student financial aid. ED has previously announced that it will calculate institutional liability for noncompliance with the incentive payment rule by calculating the cost to ED of the Title IV funds improperly received by the institution, including the cost to ED of all of the Title IV funds received by the institution over a particular period of time if those funds were obtained through implementation of a policy or practice in which students were recruited in violation of the incentive payment rule. ED may also fine an institution, or take administrative action to limit, suspend, revoke, deny, or terminate an institution’s eligibility to participate in the Title IV programs, if the institution violates the prohibition. We have designed our employee compensation and third-party contractual arrangements to comply with the incentive payment rule currently in effect. However, because there are ambiguities as to how the rule is interpreted and enforced by ED and because we could make errors in implementation, we can make no assurances that ED would not find deficiencies in our past, current, or future employee compensation plans and relevant third-party contractual arrangements. In addition, in recent years, other postsecondary education institutions have been named as defendants in whistleblower lawsuits, known as “qui tam” cases, brought pursuant to the Federal False Claims Act, alleging that an institution’s compensation practices did not comply with the incentive payment rule. Any such litigation could be costly and could divert management’s time and attention away from the business, regardless of whether a claim has merit. The incentive payment rule also influences how our institutions are able to compensate and motivate their employees. Cohort Default Rate. To remain eligible to participate in Title IV programs, an educational institution’s student loan cohort default rates must remain below certain levels. Pursuant to requirements of the HEA, if the cohort default rate for any year exceeds 40% in any single year, or exceeds 30% for three consecutive years, an institution loses eligibility to participate in Title IV programs. If an institution’s cohort default rate is equal to or greater than 30% in any year, it must establish a default prevention task force and develop a default prevention plan with measurable objectives for improving the cohort default rate. In September 2023, ED released final official cohort default rates for institutions for federal fiscal year 2020 with ED reporting a zero percent cohort default rate for APUS, RU, and HCN. These cohort default rates were favorably impacted by regulatory relief provided in connection with the COVID-19 pandemic pursuant to which borrowers with Title IV program student loans were not required to make payments on their federal loans. As explained further in “Student Loan Defaults” below, interest accrual on federal student loans resumed on September 1, 2023, and payments became due beginning October 1, 2023, which may lead to higher default rates in the future. The final official ED cohort default rates for APUS, RU, and HCN for the federal fiscal years 2018, 2019 and 2020 are as follows: 2018 2019 2020 APUS 9.4% 2.4% 0.0% RU 7.8% 1.6% 0.0% HCN 8.1% 1.1% 0.0% Student Loan Defaults. Government policies to minimize the adverse economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic have artificially lowered our institutions’ cohort default rates, which nevertheless may be higher than otherwise expected as a result of the pandemic. Congress and ED implemented a temporary freeze on student loan payments and interest accruals, which means borrowers are less likely to default on their loans and our institutions’ cohort default rates are lower not because borrowers are making timely repayments but because the government is allowing them not to make payments. In June 2023, the Fiscal Responsibility Act was enacted, ending the freeze on payments and interest accruals. Accordingly, interest accrual on federal student loans resumed on September 1, 2023, and payments became due beginning October 1, 2023, which may lead to an increase in defaults and therefore an increase in our institutions’ cohort default rates. ED has announced a 12-month “on-ramp” to repayment, running from October 1, 2023 to September 30, 2024, so that financially vulnerable borrowers who miss monthly payments during this period will not be considered delinquent, reported to 32 credit bureaus, placed in default, or referred to debt collection agencies. ED has also announced other actions intended to provide debt relief and support for student loan borrowers, such as instituting a new income-driven repayment plan. However, there can be no assurance that our institutions’ cohort default rates will benefit from these efforts, and the eventual end of the “on-ramp” period may also lead to an increase in defaults. If one of our institutions loses its eligibility to participate in Title IV programs because of high student loan default rates, students would no longer be eligible to use Title IV program funds at that institution, which would significantly reduce that institution’s enrollments and revenue and cash flows and have a material adverse effect on our results of operations. In addition, if Congress or ED restricts permitted types of default prevention assistance, the default rates of our former students may be negatively impacted. Congress could also increase the measuring period, which could also negatively impact student default rates. Gainful Employment Regulations . Pursuant to new gainful employment, or GE, regulations, that will take effect July 1, 2024, ED will determine the Title IV eligibility of GE programs based in part on satisfaction of specified performance levels of two measures defined by GE regulations: the debt-to-earnings rates (which include two rates, the discretionary debt-to-earnings rate and the annual debt-to-earnings rate) and the earnings premium measure. ED previously released a data set, referred to as the program performance data, or the PPD, that includes calculations of the two metrics for certain programs. The methodology ED used to produce the PPD differs from the methodology that will be used under the final GE regulations, primarily due to data limitations. However, out of the 30 RU programs, 47 APUS programs, and three HCN programs (including one no longer offered at HCN) that ED assessed in the PPD, six current RU programs and three APUS programs failed one or both of the new measures. The six RU programs failing in the PPD represent 8.5% of total student enrollment for the three months ended December 31, 2023. The three APUS programs failing in the PPD represent 2.1% of total net course registrations for the three months ended December 31, 2023. Programs that fail to achieve the specified performance levels of the GE measures in two of any three successive years for which the debt-to-earnings rates or the earnings premium measure are calculated would lose access to Title IV funding. Under the GE regulations, the failure of any of our institutions’ programs to satisfy the required specified performance levels could adversely impact those institutions and programs. We expect that the earliest a program could lose eligibility is July 1, 2026. In addition, programs that fail any of the metrics in a year will be required to warn enrolled and prospective students that the program risks losing access to Title IV funding. At this time, it is difficult to predict whether our institutions’ programs will satisfy the performance levels of future GE metrics, including whether the programs identified as failing in the PPD will in fact fail or whether other programs will fail or pass. Third-Party Servicers. ED regulations permit an institution to enter into a written contract with a third-party servicer for the administration of any aspect of the institution’s participation in Title IV programs. Our institutions utilize third-party servicers for some services and in the future may consider using third-party servicers for other functions that are currently managed directly by our institutions. Third-party servicers must, among other obligations, comply with Title IV requirements and be jointly and severally liable with the institution to ED for any violation by the servicer of any Title IV provision. An institution must report to ED new contracts with or any significant modifications to contracts with third-party servicers and other matters related to third-party servicers. If any third-party servicer engaged by one of our institutions does not comply with applicable statutes and regulations, our institution may be liable for its actions, and our institution could lose its eligibility to participate in Title IV programs. ED recently issued and subsequently retracted guidance that would have significantly expanded the types of activities and functions that constitute third-party servicer activities for Title IV purposes and stated ED’s position that an institution may not contract with a third-party servicer for Title IV purposes if the servicer (or its subcontractors) is located outside the U.S. or is owned or operated by an individual who is not a U.S. citizen or national or a lawful U.S. permanent resident. In a November 2023 press release, ED indicated that it intends to issue updated guidance in early 2024 with an effective date at least six months after its publication. Once final guidance is published, our institutions must assess their arrangements with third parties to determine whether a vendor must now be treated as a third-party servicer based on the guidance, and such assessment may lead to a need to modify or end existing contracts and establish new contracts. Title IV Return of Funds. When a student withdraws, an institution must return unearned Title IV program funds to ED in a timely manner. An institution must first determine the amount of funds that a student “earned” before withdrawal. If the student withdraws during the first 60% of any period of enrollment or payment period, the amount of Title IV program funds that the student earned is equal to a pro rata portion of the funds for which the student would otherwise be eligible. If the student withdraws after the 60% threshold, then the student has earned 100% of the Title IV program funds. The institution must return to the appropriate Title IV programs, in a specified order, the lesser of (i) the unearned Title IV program funds or (ii) the institutional charges incurred by the student for the period multiplied by the percentage of unearned Title IV program 33 funds. An institution must return the funds no later than 45 days after the date of the institution’s determination that a student withdrew. If 5% or more of such returns were not timely made, the institution may be required to submit a letter of credit in favor of ED equal to 25% of the amount of unearned Title IV funds the institution was required to return for its most recently completed fiscal year. If ED determines that one of our institutions has repeatedly failed to comply with ED regulations, it may take adverse action against the institution on the basis of the repeated finding or may find that the institution has failed to demonstrate administrative capability, as described above. As described in Compliance with Regulatory Standards and Effect of Regulatory Violations – Compliance Reviews, in January 2022, HCN received a program review report from ED that included a finding related to return of Title IV funds calculations that were not properly calculated. In connection with that finding, HCN was required to conduct a full file review and have the review tested by an independent auditor. In July 2022, HCN issued a final program review determination with respect to all findings, resulting in total liabilities of approximately $12,000. On August 15, 2023 the U.S. Department of Education recertified HCN's Title IV Program Participation Agreement with no restrictions and removed the prior provisional classification. Substantial Misrepresentation. Under the HEA and its implementing regulations, ED may take action against an institution in the event of substantial misrepresentation by the institution concerning the nature of its educational programs, its financial charges, or the employability of its graduates. As part of the 2022 Borrower Defense Regulations, ED modified the substantial misrepresentation rule to explicitly include certain “omissions of fact” as a basis for a misrepresentation claim or borrower defense to repayment, or BDTR, claim. If ED determines that an institution has engaged in substantial misrepresentation regarding the nature of its education program, its financial charges, or the employability of its graduates, ED may: (i) if the institution is provisionally certified, as our institutions currently are, revoke an institution’s program participation agreement or impose limitations on its participation in Title IV programs; (ii) deny participation applications made on behalf of the institution; or (iii) initiate a proceeding against the institution to fine the institution or to limit, suspend, or terminate the institution’s participation in Title IV programs. The Clery Act . Our institutions must comply with certain campus safety and security reporting requirements as well as other requirements in the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act, or the Clery Act. The Clery Act requires an institution, among other things, to report to ED and disclose in an annual security report, for the three most recent calendar years, statistics concerning the number of certain crimes that occurred on or within the institution’s “Clery geography,” which comprises an institution’s campus and non-campus buildings and property, public property on or adjacent to and accessible from the campus, and in some cases areas within the patrol jurisdiction of the campus police or security department, and to publish certain policies and procedures related to campus safety. A failure to comply with the Clery Act could result in our institutions being fined or having their eligibility to participate in Title IV programs limited, suspended, or terminated, could lead to litigation, or could harm our institutions’ reputation, each of which could, in turn, adversely affect our institutions’ enrollments and revenue and have a material effect on our business. Borrower Defenses . Under the HEA, ED is authorized to specify in regulations which acts or omissions of an institution of higher education a borrower may assert as a BDTR of a loan under the Direct Loan Program, or a Direct Loan. ED may initiate a proceeding to collect from an institution the amount of relief resulting from a borrower defense claim. Prior to 2016, ED’s regulations permitted a borrower to assert a BDTR of a Direct Loan if the institution’s acts or omissions give rise to a cause of action against the institution under state law. In November 2016, ED published the 2016 Borrower Defense Regulations, which address, among other matters, which acts or omissions of an institution of higher education a student borrower or group of borrowers may assert as a defense to repayment of a Direct Loan. For Direct Loans first disbursed on or after July 1, 2017, the 2016 Borrower Defense Regulations created a new federal standard for BDTR of Direct Loans, new limitation periods for such claims, and new processes for resolution of such claims. The 2016 Borrower Defense Regulations were in effect from July 1, 2017 until July 1, 2020 when ED published new BDTR regulations. In September 2019, ED published the 2019 Borrower Defense Regulations, which, among other things, modify the standard for BDTR of Direct Loans made on or after July 1, 2020, the limitation periods for such claims, and the processes for resolution of such claims. The 2016 Borrower Defense Regulations continue to apply to all Direct Loans made on or after July 1, 2017 and before July 1, 2020, with certain exceptions pursuant to the 2019 Borrower Defense Regulations. The 2019 Borrower Defense Regulations apply to all Direct Loans made on or after July 1, 2020 and before July 1, 2023, when ED again published new BDTR regulations. In March 2021, ED announced a revised approach for determining relief for borrowers who successfully assert borrower relief claims. Under this new approach, a borrower will receive full loan relief when evidence shows that the institution engaged in certain misconduct. This policy rescinded the prior administration’s formula that generally granted only partial loan relief for borrower defense claims. Under the 2016 Borrower Defense Regulations and the 2019 Borrower Defense Regulations, ED may initiate a separate proceeding to collect from an institution the amount of relief granted based on a BDTR claim. 34 On November 1, 2022, ED published final regulations with an effective date of July 1, 2023 to address BDTR, loan discharge, pre-dispute arbitration and class-action waivers, among other issues, or the 2022 Borrower Defense Regulations. The 2022 Borrower Defense Regulations will create a single standard and streamlined process for relief that will: apply to all future and pending BDTR claims as of July 1, 2023 instead of standards varying based on the date of the borrower’s first loan disbursement; allow students to assert borrower defenses related to Direct Consolidation Loans; define what kinds of misconduct could lead to borrower defense discharges (substantial misrepresentation, substantial omission of fact, breach of contract, aggressive and deceptive recruitment, and certain judgments or final ED actions); establish a reconsideration process for borrowers whose claims are not approved for a full discharge; create a process for forming groups of borrowers and adjudicating claims based on the common facts of those group claims; and provide a clear timeline for adjudication of group and individual claims. The 2022 Borrower Defense Regulations indicate that ED will hold colleges accountable for the cost of discharges, including by establishing a recoupment process separate from the approval of BDTR claims and making a recoupment determination based on the standards in place at the time the loan was first disbursed. The effective date of the 2022 Borrower Defense Regulations is currently enjoined nationwide by court order, which means ED currently cannot apply the 2022 Borrower Defense Regulations to any institution. As a result of the 2022 Borrower Defense Regulations injunction, ED announced that while it will not adjudicate any borrower defense applications under the 2022 Borrower Defense Regulations unless and until the effective date is reinstated, it will continue to adjudicate borrower defense applications under the 2016 Borrower Regulations and 2019 Borrower Defense Regulations if required pursuant to a court ordered settlement. In 2022, ED joined a class settlement agreement that would result in a blanket grant of automatic, presumptive relief for all BDTR applications filed by students at certain institutions through June 22, 2022, but our institutions were not included in the blanket grant of relief. The class settlement agreement would also provide certain expedited review of borrower defense claims related to institutions excluded from the automatic relief list, as well as for borrowers who applied during the period after execution of the settlement and before final approval. Borrowers had to have submitted an application by November 15, 2022 in order to receive expedited review. In December 2023, RU received from ED 338 BDTR claims, all of which had submission dates between June 23, 2022 and November 15, 2022 for students attending RU between 2000 and 2022, seeking in the aggregate a discharge of approximately $6.1 million in loans. In December 2023, HCN received from ED 77 BDTR claims, all of which were dated between June 23, 2022 and November 15, 2022 for students attending HCN between 2007 and 2022, seeking in the aggregate a discharge of approximately $1.4 million in loans. RU and HCN dispute the validity of these claims and have filed responses to them with ED. We are unable to predict whether ED will grant BDTR relief for the claims, or if so, whether it will seek recoupment from RU and/or HCN. While we have not received any claims with respect to APUS at this time, we believe is it reasonably likely that we will receive claims in the future. Refer to the Risk Factor captioned “ED rules related to BDTR claims may create significant liability that could have an adverse effect on our business” for additional information. Closed School Loan Discharge. The 2019 Borrower Defense Regulations modified ED’s requirements with respect to the circumstances under which a borrower is eligible for a loan discharge if an institution or location closes. For example, the 2016 Borrower Defense Regulations previously provided for an automatic loan discharge under certain circumstances, but the 2019 Borrower Defense Regulations eliminated the automatic loan discharge for schools closing on or after July 1, 2020. Based on the automatic loan discharge rules, ED found RU responsible for $168,630 in closed school loan discharges as a result of campus consolidations in North Dakota in 2015 and in Wisconsin in 2016; the liability was reduced on appeal to $77,569. RU may also face closed school discharge liabilities as a result of the 2021 consolidation of two Florida campuses and the 2022 consolidation of two Minnesota campuses. The 2022 Borrower Defense Regulations will provide for automatic discharges to any borrower who was enrolled within 180 days prior to a school’s closure and who did not complete their education at the school or through an approved teach-out agreement at another school within one year after the closure of their original school. The final regulations shorten the previous period for automatic discharge so borrowers do not default on their loans after a closure of their school. Dispute Resolution . The 2016 Borrower Defense Regulations, which apply to all Direct Loans made on or after July 1, 2017 and before July 1, 2020, prohibit requiring students to initially engage in an institutions’ internal complaint processes, prohibit pre-dispute arbitration agreements, and class action lawsuit waivers, and require notification to ED of arbitration filings and awards, for claims that may form the basis for a BDTR. The 2019 Borrower Defense Regulations, which apply to all Direct Loans made on or after July 1, 2020 and before July 1, 2023, generally remove these prohibitions but require institutions whose students must enter into pre-dispute arbitration agreements or class action waivers to disclose publicly those requirements, and prohibit requiring a student to participate in arbitration or any internal dispute resolution process prior to filing a BDTR application with ED. The 2022 Borrower Defense Regulations, which apply to all Direct Loans made on or after July 1, 2023 and to all BDTR claims pending as of that date, prohibit institutions from requiring borrowers to sign mandatory pre-dispute arbitration agreements or class action waivers for claims related to the making of a Federal Direct Loan or the provision of 35 educational services for which the loan was obtained. However, the effective date of the 2022 Borrower Defense Regulations is currently enjoined nationwide by court order, which means ED currently cannot apply the 2022 Borrower Defense Regulations to any institution, including the new dispute resolution rules. Other Department of Education Regulation Privacy of Student Personal Information and Records. The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974, or FERPA, and ED’s regulations implementing FERPA require education institutions to protect the privacy of students’ education records by, among other things, limiting disclosure of a student’s personally identifiable information without prior written consent. If an institution fails to comply with FERPA, ED may require corrective actions or terminate eligibility to participate in Title IV programs. In addition, education institutions engaged in financial activities such as the granting of student loans are obligated to safeguard student information pursuant to the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, or GLBA, and implementing regulations, which among other things, requires reasonable security practices to protect personally identifiable financial information of students, parents, or other individuals in a customer relationship with the institution. Failure to comply with the applicable GLBA requirements may result in FTC enforcement, which could include the imposition of conditions, penalties, monitoring, and oversight. Institutions are also subject to the FTC’s general deceptive and unfair practices jurisdiction of Section 5 of the FTC Act for processing student information. FTC enforcement focuses primarily on: (1) collecting, using, sharing, or retaining personal information inconsistent with representations, commitments, and promises in privacy policies and other public statements; (2) privacy policies that do not adequately inform consumers about actual practices; and (3) failing to reasonably protect the security, privacy, and confidentiality of personal information. Institutions must also comply with the FTC Red Flags Rule, a requirement designed to identify and mitigate identity theft for certain student accounts. States can also bring similar enforcement actions under so called “mini-FTC Acts” as well as other applicable privacy and security laws. For example, the California Consumer Privacy Act, or the CCPA, and implementing regulations impose disclosure and notice obligations on institutions and provides a broad array of consumer rights relating to California residents and their personal information, including among others, the right to access personal information, the right to opt out of sales of personal information, and the right to delete personal information. The CCPA has the potential for significant civil penalties for failing to comply as well as a private right of action and statutory damages for data breaches that are the result of unreasonable security. The California Privacy Rights Act, or CPRA, expands the CCPA’s requirements and provides certain rights to consumers to correct personal information and limit its disclosure. Other comprehensive state privacy laws that our institutions may be subject to with varying requirements also came into effect in 2023. Our collection of personal information relating to individuals in the European Union, or EU, may implicate the EU’s comprehensive General Data Protection Regulation, or GDPR. Non-compliance with the GDPR could result in a fine for certain activities of up to 20 million Euros or 4% of an organization’s global annual revenue, whichever is higher, per violation. Accessibility for Students with Disabilities . Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, or Section 504, prohibits discrimination against a person with a disability by any organization that receives federal financial assistance, which includes us. ED’s Office for Civil Rights, which enforces Section 504, together with the Department of Justice, has asserted that requiring the use of technology in a classroom environment when such technology is inaccessible to individuals with disabilities violates Section 504, unless those individuals are provided accommodations or modifications that permit them to receive all the educational benefits provided by the technology in an equally effective and integrated manner. In recent years, ED’s Office for Civil Rights has taken enforcement action against several institutions of higher education, including primarily online institutions, after determining that their websites and online learning management platforms were not accessible to persons with a disability. If one of our institutions is found to have violated Section 504, it may be required to modify existing content and functionality of its online classroom or other uses of technology, including through adoption of specific technical standards. An institution that does not come into compliance with Section 504 could lose access to federal funding, including the ability to participate in the Title IV programs and TA. Title IX . Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, or Title IX, prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex in education programs that receive funding from the federal government. ED regulations effective as of August 2020 define what constitutes sexual harassment for purposes of Title IX in the administrative enforcement context, describe what actions trigger an institution’s obligation to respond to incidents of alleged sexual harassment, and specify how an institution must respond to allegations of sexual harassment. In June 2022, ED released proposed regulations that would significantly revise how schools, including higher education institutions, must address cases involving sex-based discrimination, including cases of sexual harassment, sex-based harassment, and assault. The proposed regulations also would explicitly include protections against discrimination based on sexual orientation, gender identity, and sex characteristics. In addition, the proposed regulations would update protections against discrimination because of pregnancy, related conditions, or terminations of pregnancy. Distance Education. Regulations that were effective July 2021 provide institutions additional flexibility in offering distance education and competency-based education programs. Definitions in the rule clarify the instructional requirements that 36 distance education programs must abide in order to remain eligible for Title IV disbursements. Failure to comply with these standards could lead to adverse actions by ED. Department of Defense Regulation of Tuition Service members of the U.S. Armed Forces are eligible to receive tuition assistance from their branch of service through the DoD’s TA program. Service members may use TA to pursue postsecondary degrees at institutions that are accredited by accrediting agencies recognized by ED. APUS participates in TA, and for students in APUS undergraduate, and beginning January 2020, for students in APUS master’s programs, APUS provided grants so that APUS tuition rates per credit hour can be 100% covered by TA provided that the student does not exceed their annual funding limits per student. RU and HCN also participate in TA. RU’s active-duty military students in most undergraduate programs and master’s level graduate programs receive per credit tuition pricing at a tuition rate that is commensurate with available TA funding to allow tuition charges to be 100% covered by TA. HCN offers an alumni achievement grant of up to $1,200 to assist qualifying PN program alumni as they progress into the ADN program, as well as an institutional affordability grant to students demonstrating financial need to cover the difference between the total cost of tuition and fees less the amount of all eligible financial aid resources. In March 2013, DoD restricted the ability of service members who have not previously taken a postsecondary education course and who are in certain duty locations outside the continental United States, or overseas locations, to receive TA for courses offered by institutions of higher education that are not parties to contracts with the DoD to provide DoD voluntary education programs at those locations. Because we do not have contracts with the DoD to provide instruction at overseas locations, service members who begin their first postsecondary education program after arrival at an applicable overseas location may not use TA to pay for their education in our programs until after they have already successfully completed a course with an institution that has entered into a contract to provide voluntary education programs at that overseas location. Service members who were already enrolled in one of our programs before arriving at an overseas location may continue to receive TA for the in-progress program, but they will be encouraged to enroll in courses provided by institutions that provide programs at the applicable overseas location. DoD requires educational institutions to meet certain criteria, including generally having at least 20 students on base, and to request access in writing that outlines among other things the specific purpose of the visit, in order to access installations solely to provide counseling, and generally prohibits education institutions from holding regular or recurring office hours on installations solely to provide counseling. This limits APUS’s ability to support existing students and serve new students. If APUS is not able to improve its access to military installations and its existing students on those installations, or find alternative methods to serve those students, its military enrollments may decline. Each institution participating in TA is required to sign a Memorandum of Understanding, or MOU, outlining certain commitments and agreements between the institution and DoD prior to being permitted to participate in TA. Pursuant to the DoD MOUs, among other requirements, institutions must: explain certain tools to service members, such as ED’s “College Navigator” website and the “Paying for College” website of the CFPB; comply with requirements related to readmission policies for service members; abide by limitations on the use of funds derived from TA; provide certain academic and student support services; disclose information about transfer of credit; in certain circumstances, return TA funds to DoD (such as when a student ceases to attend or an institution cancels a course); offer to service members loan counseling before private student loans are offered or recommended; and comply with ED’s Title IV “program integrity” rules, including rules related to incentive payments and misrepresentation. The DoD MOUs also provide that an institution may only participate in TA if it is accredited by an accrediting agency recognized by ED, approved for VA funding, and a participant in Title IV programs. Additional information regarding the potential risks associated with the DoD MOUs is provided in the “Risk Factors” section of this Annual Report. Several federal government agencies have established an online student complaint system for service members, veterans, and their families to report negative experiences at education institutions and training programs administering the Post-9/11 GI Bill, TA, and other military-related education benefit programs. An institution having recurring substantive complaints, or demonstrating an unwillingness to resolve complaints, may face a range of penalties, including revocation of its MOU and removal from participation in TA. Department of Defense Funding A series of automatic federal budget cuts, known as sequestration, have impacted certain federal student aid programs since fiscal year 2013 and have been extended through fiscal year 2030. As a result of uncertainty about the availability of 37 funding, several military branches initially suspended and later announced changes to their TA programs. For example, the Army now requires service members to complete one year of service after graduation from Advanced Individual Training in order to be eligible for TA, and the Army and the Coast Guard have both reduced the total per service member annual benefits. Congressional inaction on budgetary matters has led to lapses in funding, resulting in government shutdowns, and subsequent policy changes that have affected federal student aid programs at DoD. A future government shutdown, particularly one that includes DoD or suspension or resulting modification of TA programs, including in connection with the failure to increase or a delay in increasing the federal debt ceiling, could have a material adverse effect on APUS’s enrollments and on our cash flows, results of operations, and financial condition. Funding shortfalls have also affected DoD federal student aid programs. For example, as a result of the expected exhaustion of annual TA benefits available to sailors, in May 2019, the Navy ceased approving TA funds for eligible sailors until the start of the government’s fiscal year 2020. Currently, Navy service members must have a minimum of three years of service before becoming eligible to use TA and cannot be in their last year of service, and for TA and the Navy College Program for Afloat College Education, funding is capped at 18 semester hours per fiscal year combined, and career funding is capped at 120 semester hours combined. In addition, eligible sailors can only use TA to fund two courses each quarter of the fiscal year, and reservists on one-year orders are ineligible for TA. In 2024, Congress approved an approximately 5.9% increase in the funds appropriated for DoD federal student aid programs; however, it is unclear whether the increased funding will encourage the military branches to expand service member eligibility for TA programs, or the amount of the service member annual benefit. We expect each military branch and the DoD to continually evaluate their approach to education funding, and the resulting changes could have an impact on the funds available to service members to pursue their education at our institutions. Department of Veterans Affairs The VA administers education benefits provided by federal law, including the Montgomery GI Bill, or GI Bill, and the Post-9/11 GI Bill. APUS, RU and HCN are approved to provide education to veterans and members of the selective reserve and their dependents in West Virginia for APUS, and by the state approving agencies in states where RU and HCN campuses are located. In order for an institution to participate in VA education benefits, it must be a participant in the Title IV programs. For the 2023-2024 academic year, an eligible veteran who attends a non-public U.S. institution may receive veterans’ education benefits to pay for tuition and fees based on the net cost to the veteran up to $27,120.05. Veterans pursuing a program of education on a more than half-time basis at an on-campus location are eligible for a monthly housing allowance equal to the basic allowance for housing available to service members in that location who are at a military pay grade E-5 and have dependents. Veterans pursuing a program of education solely through distance education on a more than half-time basis are eligible to receive a monthly housing allowance equal to 50% of the national average, or $967.40 per month. To the extent that TA does not cover the full cost of tuition for service members, eligible service members may also use their benefits under the GI Bill or the Post-9/11 GI Bill through the “Top-Up” program. The “Top-Up” program allows U.S. Military active-duty service members to use their GI Bill or Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits to pay the difference between the total cost of a college course and the amount of TA that is paid by the military for the course but is limited to 36 months of payments. The Johnny Isakson and David P. Roe, M.D. Veterans Health Care and Benefits Improvement Act of 2020, or the Isakson Roe Act, enacted in January 2021, modified policies related to GI Bill and other VA-administered education funds, in part to align VA requirements with DoD and ED requirements related to student financial aid. Section 1018 of the Isakson Roe Act mandates that schools that receive veterans education benefits: (i) provide VA students with information on total cost of an education program, an estimate of debt the student will have upon graduation, graduation rates, requirements to obtain any license, certification, or approval for which the course of education is designed to provide preparation, and certain other information; (ii) inform VA students of the availability and potential eligibility of federal financial aid before packaging or arranging private student loans or alternative financing programs; (iii) avoid fraudulent and unduly aggressive recruiting or automatic renewal techniques; (iv) avoid misrepresentations or payment of incentive compensation on the basis of securing enrollments; (v) provide VA students with information regarding graduation requirements; (vii) obtain required approvals from the institutions’ accrediting agency for new courses or programs; (viii) maintain a policy to accommodate service members and reservists to be readmitted if they are temporarily unable to attend due to service requirements; and (ix) appoint a point of contact to provide academic and financial aid advising. 38 The Responsible Education Mitigating Options and Technical Extensions Act, enacted in December 2021, provides COVID-19 related extensions to certain veterans education benefits and clarifies that the Isakson Roe Act Section 1018 prohibition on incentive compensation does not apply to foreign students residing outside the U.S. who are ineligible for federal student financial aid. Institutions were generally required to be in compliance with the Isakson Roe Act by August 2021. However, the Isakson Roe Act allowed institutions to seek from the VA a one-academic-year waiver of Section 1018. Subsequently, the REMOTE Act delayed the effective date of the Isakson Roe Act’s Section 1018 requirements to August 1, 2022, and institutions were permitted to seek a one-academic-year waiver of that deadline beginning June 15, 2022. RU did not seek a waiver of the August 1, 2021 compliance deadline, and it satisfied Section 1018 requirements by that deadline. In September 2021, APUS and HCN received waivers for the requirements of Section 1018 for the period August 1, 2021 through July 31, 2022. APUS and HCN did not seek additional waiver extensions, and they satisfied Section 1018 requirements by July 31, 2022. The Training in High-Demand Roles to Improve Veteran Employment Act, or the THRIVE Act, enacted in June 2021, amended provisions related to veterans education programs found in ARPA and the Isakson Roe Act. The legislation requires the VA to work with the Department of Labor to determine the list of high-demand occupations for rapid retraining assistance, excludes programs pursued solely through distance learning on a half-time basis or less from the housing stipend available to those in the retraining program, and requires the Government Accountability Office to report on the outcomes and effectiveness of retraining programs. The legislation also requires the VA to take disciplinary action if a person with whom an institution has an agreement to provide educational or recruiting services violates the VA’s incentive compensation prohibitions. On August 26, 2022, the President signed into law the Ensuring the Best Schools for Veterans Act of 2022, which modifies how the VA implements the rule generally forbidding use of VA benefits for students enrolling in a program in which more than 85% of students enrolled in the program have any portion of their tuition, fees, or other charges paid to or for them by the institution or by the VA, or the 85/15 Requirement. Among other things, the law clarifies that reporting associated with the 85/15 Requirement generally does not apply to institutions at which 35% or fewer students receive GI bill benefits, computed separately for the main campus and any branch or extension of the institution. The law also exempts programs for which fewer than 10 students have any portion of their tuition, fees, or other charges paid to or for them by the institution or by the VA. An institution that meets the requirements for an exemption must submit verifying information to the VA on a biennial basis. Additional Sources of Student Payments In addition to the Title IV, DoD, and VA programs described above, eligible students may participate in other financial aid programs or receive support from other governmental and private sources. Some of our students finance their own education or receive full or partial employer tuition reimbursement. Our institutions enter into agreements with various employers through which our institutions agree to a variety of terms, including terms related to the provision of tuition grants to eligible employees. Our institutions may offer interest free payment plans of less than 12 months to students to assist them with the financing of educational expenses. In certain circumstances, our students may access alternative loan programs from a number of private lenders, which are intended to cover the difference between what the student receives from all financial aid sources and the student’s total cost of attendance. As a condition to an institution’s participation in the Title IV programs, the institution must adopt a code of conduct pertaining to student loans, including alternative loans. HCN offers its students an extended payment plan option. The extended payment plan is designed to assist students with educational costs including tuition and fees. The extended payment plan is subject to various federal and state laws and regulations, such as the Truth in Lending Act as implemented in Regulation Z, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act as implemented in Regulation B and the Unfair, Deceptive or Abusive Acts or Practices provisions of Title X of the Dodd-Frank Act. Beginning January 1, 2020, HCN began offering an institutional affordability grant to students demonstrating financial need to cover the difference between the total cost of tuition and fees less the amount of all eligible financial aid resources. The grant is designed to limit a student’s monthly payment to $200 through an award of up to $200 per month, or $600 per term after consideration of financial aid, employer tuition reimbursement, and other financial resources. Consumer Protection Consumer Financial Protection Bureau 39 The CFPB has pursued enforcement actions against certain for-profit institutions of higher education and has released several reports that directly address issues related to institutions of higher education. In October 2023, the CFPB Education Loan Ombudsman released its annual report analyzed approximately 2,350 private student loan complaints (a decrease of approximately 21% compared to prior-year data) and approximately 6,934 federal student loan complaints (an increase of approximately 27% compared to prior-year data). The CFPB indicated that almost nine in ten complaints involved problems consumers had dealing with their loan servicer. We do not know what enforcement actions the CFPB may pursue, or what steps Congress or federal agencies may take, in response to these reports and whether such actions, if any, will have an adverse effect on our business or results of operations. Federal Trade Commission In October 2021, in what it termed a broad-based initiative to deter for-profit college fraud, the FTC issued informational notices to 70 for-profit higher education institutions, including APUS and RU, informing them of certain marketing practices the FTC had previously determined to be deceptive or unfair and therefore unlawful under the FTC Act. The FTC indicated that an institution’s receipt of the notice was not an indication that the institution has engaged in deceptive or unfair conduct. The informational notices were sent in furtherance of an FTC Act provision permitting penalties against those engaging in unfair or deceptive acts or practices with actual knowledge of their unfair or deceptive nature. The informational notices informed the institutions that engaging in such practices could subject a company to civil penalties under that provision. By providing the informational notices, the FTC is able to document that the institutions have knowledge that the FTC has found these marketing practices to be unfair or deceptive. The FTC also announced that it would be enhancing its enforcement cooperation with other agencies with oversight of educational institutions, including ED’s Office of Federal Student Aid and the VA. We do not know what enforcement actions the FTC may pursue in light of its recent informational notices and whether such actions, if any, will have an adverse effect on our business or results of operations. Other Issues Related to Consumer Protection and Complaints Many states have become more active in regulating for-profit education from a consumer protection perspective, specifically related to enforcement of consumer protection laws and implementation of new regulations by state attorneys general. Actions by state attorneys general and other governmental agencies, whether or not involving us or our institutions, could damage our reputation and the reputation of our institutions and limit the ability to recruit and enroll students, which could reduce student demand for our institutions’ programs and adversely impact our revenue and cash flow from operations. Our institutions are recipients of complaints filed with state regulatory authorities, the Better Business Bureau, and posted in online forums. Our institutions attempt to resolve such complaints in a cooperative manner. However, even if such complaints are resolved or are otherwise unfounded, they may still harm the reputation of our institutions. On October 8, 2021, ED announced that it had restored an Office of Enforcement within ED’s Office of Federal Student Aid to strengthen oversight of and enforcement actions against postsecondary institutions that participate in federal student loan, grant, and work-study programs. Compliance with Regulatory Standards and the Effect of Regulatory Violations Compliance Reviews Our institutions are subject to compliance reviews and audits by various external agencies, including ED, ED OIG, state licensing agencies, DoD, VA, and accrediting agencies. The HEA and ED regulations also require institutions to submit annually a compliance audit conducted by an independent certified public accountant in accordance with Government Auditing Standards and applicable ED OIG audit standards. In addition, to enable ED to make a determination of financial responsibility, institutions must annually submit audited financial statements prepared in accordance with ED regulations. In September 2016, ED began a program review of APUS’s administration of the Title IV programs during the 2014-2015 and 2015-2016 award years. ED closed the program review in January 2021, with no findings, penalties, or requirements for further action. In July 2017, ED began a program review of RU’s administration of Title IV program during the 2015-2016 and 2016-2017 award years. In September 2022, RU received a program review report from ED that asserted 14 findings of noncompliance with Title IV rules, including rules related to Title IV administration, policies, and consumer information and reporting requirements, and the federal work study, Pell Grant, and Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grant programs. The program review required RU to do a review in connection with the federal work study finding, prepare policies 40 and procedures, return small amounts of funds to two students, provide training, and take other actions in connection with the findings, and to provide a response, which RU timely provided. In July 2023, ED officially closed the program review by issuing a final program review determination and indicating that 12 of the findings were considered resolved with no liabilities. The remaining two findings related to Title IV administration had established liabilities of less than $100. ED determined that the total liability was minimal as it was under the $1,000 threshold so no recoupment was required; however, RU was responsible for, and has taken all steps necessary in ensuring that adequate corrective procedures had been implemented. In July 2022, HCN received from ED the final program review determination from a review that had been pending since June 2017, and in September 2022 ED notified HCN that it had closed the program review, and no further action was required. The review included findings of a failure to prorate fees, return of Title IV funds calculations that were not properly computed, untimely and inaccurate reporting to the National Student Loan Data System, incomplete verification, and cost of attendance formulation deficiencies. HCN was required to do a full file review in connection with the return of Title IV funds finding, to have the review tested by an independent auditor, and to prepare policies and procedures and take other actions in connection with the findings. The total liability for this finding was $11,714.10, consisting of $11,538.00 principal owed to ED and $176.10 for the cost of funds associated with the unreturned funds. In order to participate in TA, institutions must agree to participate in DoD’s Voluntary Education Institutional Compliance Program, or ICP. An institution that, through the ICP, is found noncompliant with DoD requirements and demonstrates an unwillingness to resolve a finding may be subject to a range of penalties from a written warning to termination of the institution’s participation in TA. APUS and RS have previously been subject to ICP reviews. For example, in February 2020, DoD informed APUS that it was one of 250 institutions selected for ICP review in 2020. Upon request, in May 2020, APUS submitted a self-assessment in connection with the ICP. On November 30, 2020, DoD issued a report finding that APUS did not clearly articulate certain policies or clearly make certain disclosures. As required, APUS submitted its corrective action plan and related evidentiary support and in April 2021, APUS was informed that the review had been completed and no further actions are required. Potential Effect of Regulatory Violations If our institutions fail to comply with the regulatory standards governing Title IV programs, ED could impose one or more sanctions, including transferring our institutions to the reimbursement or cash monitoring system of payment, seeking to require repayment of certain Title IV program funds, requiring the posting of an irrevocable letter of credit in favor of ED as a condition for continued Title IV certification, taking emergency action against our institutions, referring the matter for criminal prosecution, or initiating proceedings to impose a fine or to limit, condition, suspend, or terminate participation in Title IV programs. If our institution’s approval to participate in Title IV programs is terminated, it will also lose its ability to participate in TA pursuant to its DoD MOU, as well as in education benefits administered by the VA. If such sanctions or proceedings were imposed against our institutions and resulted in a substantial curtailment, or termination, of participation in Title IV programs, this would materially and adversely affect our enrollments, revenue, results of operations, and financial condition. If one of our institutions were to lose its eligibility to participate in Title IV programs, or if the amount of available Title IV program funds were reduced, we could seek to arrange or provide alternative sources of revenue or financial aid for students. Although we believe that one or more private organizations would be willing to provide financial assistance to students attending our institutions, there is no assurance that this would be the case, and the interest rate and other terms of such financial aid might not be as favorable as those for Title IV program funds. We may be required to guarantee all or part of such alternative assistance or might incur other additional costs in connection with securing alternative sources of financial aid. Accordingly, the loss of our eligibility to participate in Title IV programs, or a reduction in the amount of available federal student financial aid, would be expected to have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations even if we could arrange or provide alternative sources of revenue or student financial aid. In addition to the actions that may be brought against us as a result of our institutions’ participation in Title IV programs, we also may be subject, from time to time, to complaints and lawsuits relating to regulatory compliance brought not only by our regulatory agencies, but also by other government agencies and third parties, such as present or former students or employees and other members of the public. 41 Regulatory Actions and Restrictions on Operations Many actions that we may wish to take in connection with our operations are subject to regulation from a variety of agencies. For example, ED’s regulations, state regulatory requirements, and accrediting agency standards may, in certain instances, limit our ability to acquire or sell institutions, and to establish additional locations and programs. For example, as described in “Student Financing Sources and Related Regulations/Requirements – Department of Education – Regulation of Title IV Financial Aid Programs – Eligibility and Certification Procedures”, RU is currently subject to certain temporary growth restrictions on the institution, including imposing limitations on new programs and locations and imposing a cap on the number of students that participate in Title IV programs that can be enrolled. Many states require approval before institutions can add new programs, campuses, or teaching locations. Generally, these agencies require institutions to notify them, and sometimes require institutions to obtain their approval, in advance of opening a new location or implementing new programs. APUS is regulated by its institutional accreditor, the HLC, as well as a state agency in West Virginia. RU’s is regulated by its institutional accreditor, the HLC, as well as the six state agencies where RU physical campuses are located, which include Florida, Illinois, Kansas, Minnesota, North Dakota, and Wisconsin. HCN is regulated by ABHES, and the state agencies in Ohio, Indiana, and Michigan. GSUSA is regulated by the Accrediting Council for Continuing Education & Training, as well as a district agency in the District of Columbia. Change in Ownership Resulting in a Change of Control ED’s regulations, state regulatory requirements, and accreditation standards may limit our ability to acquire, merge, or sell institutions, and may impose restrictions on activities following a transaction. For example, ED must approve any change in ownership resulting in a change of control of APEI, our institutions or any institution we may acquire. These restrictions may impede our ability to grow by acquisition, or to dispose of assets. Moreover, as a publicly traded company, the potential adverse regulatory effects of a change of control could influence future decisions by us and our stockholders regarding the sale, purchase, transfer, issuance, or redemption of our stock. In addition, the regulatory burdens and risks associated with a change of control could discourage bids for our shares of common stock and could have an adverse effect on the market price of our shares. For example, the Rasmussen Acquisition was required to be reported to, and in some cases approved by, various education regulatory bodies. RU also pursued post-closing notices and consents related to the change in ownership. State agencies, accreditors, boards of nursing, and other relevant regulators also required further action with respect to the Rasmussen Acquisition. For example, HLC required an additional site visit within six months of the closing date of the Rasmussen Acquisition, and the visit occurred in February 2022. Additionally, some regulators required approval after the change in ownership in order to continue proper licensure, accreditation, approval, or authorization. In addition, on January 1, 2022, APEI acquired substantially all of the assets of GSUSA for approximately $1.0 million, subject to working capital adjustments. GSUSA is licensed by the D.C. Higher Education Licensure Commission, or DCHELC, and accredited by ACCET. DCHELC and ACCET approved the transaction. U.S. Department of Education An institution that undergoes a change in ownership resulting in a change of control loses its eligibility to participate in Title IV programs and must apply to ED in order to reestablish such eligibility. ED regulations define what constitutes a change in ownership and control of various types of legal entities. For example, ED regulations provide that a change of control of a publicly traded company occurs in one of two ways: (i) there is an event that would obligate the corporation to file a Current Report on Form 8-K with the Securities and Exchange Commission disclosing a change of control; or (ii) the corporation has a stockholder that owns at least 25% of the total outstanding voting stock of the corporation and is the largest stockholder of the corporation, and that stockholder ceases to own at least 25% of such stock, or ceases to be the largest stockholder. As a result, a significant purchase or disposition of our voting stock, including an acquisition resulting in a stockholder owning at least 25% of our outstanding stock, could be determined by ED to be a change in ownership and control. The HEA provides that after an institution undergoes a change in ownership and control ED may temporarily provisionally certify the institution based on a materially complete application received within 10 business days after the change occurred. ED may continue such temporary provisional certification on a month-to-month basis until it has rendered a final decision on the institution’s application, provided the institution has timely supplied all required information and documentation. If ED approves the application, it issues a provisional certification, which extends for a period expiring not later than the end of the third complete award year following the date of provisional certification. 42 When a change in ownership and control occurs, ED applies certain financial tests to determine the financial responsibility of the institution under the new ownership. The institution generally is required to submit a same-day audited balance sheet reflecting the financial condition of the institution immediately following the change in ownership and control, and the same-day balance sheet must satisfy certain requirements. In addition, when a change in ownership and control occurs and there is a new owner, the institution must submit to ED the new owner’s audited financial statements for its two most recently completed fiscal years. If those audits do not satisfy ED requirements, ED may impose conditions on continued Title IV participation, such as a letter of credit, certain growth restrictions including with respect to adding locations and programs, and additional monitoring requirements. ED’s financial responsibility standards are described more fully above in “Student Financing Sources and Related Regulations/Requirements – Department of Education – Regulation of Title IV Financial Aid Programs – Financial Responsibility”. In October 2022, ED announced final regulations relating to change in ownership and change in control rules and procedures, effective July 1, 2023. The ownership interest threshold for publicly traded corporations remains at 25%, as described above. For entities that are not closely held or publicly traded corporations, including limited liability companies, limited liability partnerships, limited partnerships, and similar types of legal entities, the final regulations increase the ownership interest threshold from 25% to 50% for a change in ownership that results in a change in control automatically triggering ED’s approval process, and also provide that ED’s approval process may apply when a change in control occurs despite not meeting the 50 percent threshold. The final regulations also require institutions to notify ED and students of a planned change in ownership that results in a change in control at least 90 days in advance. In addition, the final regulations impose reporting obligations on institutions for changes in ownership that do not result in a change in control, lowering the threshold for reporting such changes from 25 percent to 5 percent ownership interest for all entity types. The final regulations also: require additional financial protection (i.e., letters of credit) when a new owner is lacking financial statements or as ED determines necessary; and eliminate the existing requirement that ED continue an institution’s participation with the same terms and conditions in their Title IV agreement as prior to the transaction. In addition, the final regulations define “main campus” and modify the definitions of “additional location” and “branch campus” to clarify that a location must be within the same “ownership structure” of the institution. State Regulatory Agencies Many states require institutions of higher education to report or obtain approval of certain changes in ownership or other aspects of institutional status. The types of and triggers for such reporting or approval vary, but many states include the sale of a controlling interest of common stock in the definition of a change of control requiring approval. A change of control may require us to obtain approval of the change in ownership and control in order to maintain our state approval. In certain circumstances, state approving agencies responsible for oversight of veterans education benefits also may require an institution to obtain approval for a change in ownership and control. Accreditors Many accrediting agencies, including HLC, require institutions of higher education to report or obtain approval for certain changes in legal status, ownership, form of control, or other aspects of institutional status, but the types of and triggers for such reporting or approval vary. Many accrediting agencies also require on-site evaluations to confirm the appropriateness of any approval. Some accrediting agencies’ oversight may also extend to defined changes that occur in an institution’s parent or controlling entity, and not necessarily the institution itself. Such oversight could trigger additional reviews of the institution and possible change in accreditation status. Should we attempt to enter into transactions with institutions accredited by other accreditors, we would be required to follow the requirements of such accreditors. Our management may not have experience with the accreditors of the target institution, which would increase the risks related to such a transaction and management of the institution subsequent to the transaction. Restrictions on Adding Locations and Educational Programs ED may, as a condition of participation in Title IV programs, require prior approval of new locations, programs, or otherwise restrict the number of programs an institution may add. ED’s regulations require institutions to report and, in certain cases (such as when an institution is provisionally certified such as APUS and RU), to seek approval for a new additional campus location at which at least 50% of a program will be offered if the institution wants to disburse Title IV program funds to students enrolled at that location. Institutions are responsible for knowing whether they need approval, and institutions that add locations and programs and disburse Title IV program funds in connection with those locations and programs without having obtained any necessary approval may be subject to administrative repayments and other sanctions. 43 The HEA requires for-profit institutions to be in full operation for two years before qualifying to participate in Title IV programs. However, ED regulations in many circumstances permit an institution that is already qualified to participate in Title IV programs to establish additional campus locations that are exempt from the two-year rule. The new campus location must satisfy all other applicable requirements for institutional eligibility, including approval by the relevant state authorizing agency and the institution’s accrediting agency. Provisionally certified institutions of higher education such as APUS and RU, and institutions on HCM1 like RU, must seek prior approval from ED to offer new academic programs eligible for Title IV program funds and to open new locations at which Title IV program funds will be disbursed. A fully certified degree-granting institution generally is not obligated to obtain ED’s prior approval for a new location, an additional program leading to a degree at the same level previously approved by ED, or a new program that both prepares students for gainful employment in the same or related recognized occupation as an education program that has previously been designated as an eligible program at that institution and meets certain minimum-length requirements. However, ED could nevertheless require a fully certified institution to obtain prior approval for new programs and locations for purposes of Title IV program participation. Other Regulations GSUSA’s contracts are governed by the Federal Acquisition Regulation, or FAR, a regulatory framework. The FAR affects how GSUSA interacts and does business with its federal government clients, including by providing government agencies with rights not typically found in commercial contracts. Our government contracts may provide for termination by the government at any time, without cause. In addition, we may be subject to audits and investigations relating to these contracts, and any violations could result in civil and criminal penalties and administrative sanctions, including termination of contract, refund or suspension of payments, forfeiture of profits, payment of fines, and suspension or debarment from future government business. Our GSA Schedule contract is set to expire on March 4, 2024, and GSUSA is preparing its application for a new GSA Schedule contract. If a new contract is not entered into, GSUSA’s government business would be materially adversely impacted. Information about risks associated with GSUSA’s contracts being governed by the FAR is provided in the “Risk Factors” section of this Annual Report. Other Recent Legislative and Regulatory Activity Many of our students rely on federally funded programs, including Title IV programs, TA and education benefits administered by the VA that may be affected by changes in the federal budget. Due to the substantial amount of federal funds disbursed to schools through Title IV programs, TA and education benefits administered by the VA, the large number of students and institutions participating in these programs, and significant political interest in the cost of education, Congress continues to show interest in regulation and oversight of institutions of higher education, especially those that are for-profit. In addition, ED announced its intent to hold negotiated rulemaking sessions in 2024 to address other topics for which proposed or final regulations have not yet been issued, including the recognition of accrediting agencies, institutional eligibility, return of Title IV funds, cash management, and third-party servicers. 44 ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of risk. Before making an investment, you should carefully consider the following risks, as well as the other information contained in this Annual Report, including our “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations”. Any of the risk factors described below could significantly and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows, and prospects. The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones we face. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we currently believe are not material may also adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows, and prospects. As a result of the risks and uncertainties described below, as well as such additional risks and uncertainties, the trading price of our common stock could decline, and you may lose all or part of your investment. Risks Related to Attracting and Retaining Students Our success and financial performance depend on the effectiveness of our ability to attract students who persist in our institutions’ programs. Building awareness and reputation among potential students of our institutions and the programs they offer is critical to our institutions’ ability to attract new students. In order to maintain and increase our revenue, profits, and cash flows, our institutions must continue to enroll new, qualified students in a cost-effective manner, and these students must remain active and be successful in our institutions’ programs. In addition, because our institutions experience declines in their student populations as a result of graduation, transfers to other academic institutions, withdrawals, military deployments, and other reasons, in order to grow, we need to first attract sufficient students to replace those who have left. In addition to broader challenges with attracting qualified students, any negative effects resulting from the occurrence of risks set forth in this “Risk Factors” section, from action or inaction by us, regulators or accrediting agencies, or events beyond our control could prevent us from successfully advertising and marketing our institutions’ programs and from successfully enrolling and retaining qualified students in those programs. If we are unable to continue to develop awareness and a positive reputation of our institutions and the programs we offer, and to recruit and enroll students that persist in our programs over time, our enrollments will suffer and there could be a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. If we are unable to effectively market our programs or expand into new markets, our results of operations would be negatively affected. Our marketing strategy for APUS traditionally focused on building long-term, mutually beneficial relationships with businesses, other organizations, and individuals in military, military-affiliated, and public service communities. We must continue to develop and expand marketing channels that attract college-ready students unaffiliated with the military who may perform well at APUS, including given limitations on access to military students, as discussed further below under the Risk Factor that begins “If APUS does not have strong relationships with, and access to, various military installations...”, and a continued focus on efforts to attract students outside of the military, including in order to maintain compliance with the 90/10 Rule. However, we have experienced challenges attracting such students, and there is no assurance that we will be able to do so on a cost-effective basis or to prevent a further decline in non-military enrollments at APUS. Furthermore, because APUS’s tuition is generally lower than that of most of its competitors, it has fewer dollars to spend per student on marketing and advertising than its competitors. Our pricing structure and margin profile may limit the availability of financial resources to be used for marketing and enrollment in general. Nevertheless, we have tried to, and may in the future try to, implement new marketing tactics and channels, including those with which we have no experience, and there is no guarantee that our marketing and branding efforts will achieve the desired results. If we are unable to develop and optimize marketing and advertising programs that are effective in developing awareness of our institutions and the programs we offer and their value propositions and are unable to enroll and retain qualified students in military and non-military markets, our enrollments would suffer, and there could be a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. The success of RU and HCN depends, in part, on our ability to maintain and increase student enrollments in those institutions’ programs. As part of our strategy to continue to build a national nursing platform, we intend to open new campuses and other operating locations; however, as a result of disciplinary actions, RU is currently and may continue to be limited in its ability to expand into new geographical markets. Accordingly, there is no assurance that we will be able to effectuate this expansion strategy at RU and HCN or if such strategy will achieve desired results. For more on the limitations on our ability to expand our nursing programs into new geographical markets, see also the Risk Factors that begin with the captions “If our institutions are unable to successfully adjust…,” “If we or our institutions fail to comply with the extensive regulatory…,” “Failure to improve certain of our programs’ NCLEX pass rates...,” “RU’s planned closure of its Bloomington…,” and “RU is 45 currently on provisional certification with ED…,” as well as “Regulatory Environment – Regulatory Actions and Restrictions on Operations” and “Regulatory Environment – Student Financing Sources and Related Regulations/Requirements” generally. Opening new campuses and locations requires us to obtain appropriate federal, state, and accrediting agency approvals and to comply with any related requirements from those agencies. In addition, with the opening of new campuses, we have been and will be marketing in geographic areas in which our institutions did not previously have a campus, and these marketing efforts may not be successful. If in the future we are unable to effectively market RU’s and HCN’s programs, we may not be able to successfully maintain and increase those institutions’ enrollments, which would negatively affect our results of operations. If we are unable to, or suffer any delay in our ability to, obtain appropriate approvals and accreditations, open, and attract additional students to new campus locations, offer programs at new campuses in a cost-effective manner, identify appropriate clinical placements, or otherwise effectively manage the operations of newly established campuses, our results of operations and financial condition could be adversely affected. In addition, the inability to expand existing programs efficiently, or successfully, pursue new program initiatives, and add new campuses, including as a result of marketing failures, would harm our ability to grow our business and could have an adverse impact on our financial condition. If APUS does not have strong relationships with, and access to, various military installations and installation education centers, our ability to maintain enrollments from military students and our future growth may be impaired. We are highly dependent on our relationship with the military and its members, and our ability to attract and retain military service members as students. Because APUS relies on referrals and personal relationships for recruiting, impediments to access can have an adverse effect on maintaining and generating registrations from military students. DoD requires us to meet certain criteria, including generally having at least 20 students on base, and to request access in writing, in order to access installations solely to provide counseling, and generally prohibits us from holding regular or recurring office hours on installations solely to provide counseling. This adversely affects our efforts to support existing students and serve new students. Furthermore, DoD MOUs, which specify terms and conditions of participation in TA and are discussed in more depth in “Regulatory Environment – Student Financing Sources and Related Regulations/Requirements – Department of Defense”, and the related increased focus by DoD on relationships with and oversight of educational providers, or additional DoD restrictions, could lead to adverse changes in the nature of our relationships with military installations and their education centers and our access to military service members. An inability to maintain strong relationships with installation education centers and with military service members would have an adverse effect on APUS’s ability to attract and retain qualified students, resulting in an adverse effect on our financial condition. Enrollments and course registrations by active-duty service members may be adversely affected by a variety of factors not directly related to education programs, including changes in military activity, budgets and government shutdowns. Events not directly related to education programs could lead to a reduction in registrations from students on active duty. For example, after experiencing an increase in net course registrations in 2020, which we believe may have been due in part to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, registration and enrollments thereafter moderated, including as a result of broader education sector enrollment headwinds and, in certain periods, disruption resulting from the transition to ArmyIgnitED discussed elsewhere in this Annual Report. Large-scale personnel reductions or other significant drawdowns of U.S. active-duty military forces would also likely have a negative effect on enrollment and course registrations. Increased operations and overseas deployments, increased demands on active-duty service members, and limited internet access associated with some deployments could also negatively impact the ability of certain active-duty military students to pursue higher education. Congressional inaction on budgetary matters has led to lapses in funding, resulting in government shutdowns, and subsequent policy changes that have affected federal student aid programs at DoD. A future government shutdown, particularly one that impacts DoD or includes suspension or resulting modification of TA programs, including in connection with congressional action or inaction relating to the federal debt ceiling, could have a material adverse effect on APUS’s enrollments and on our cash flows, results of operations, and financial condition. In addition, budget cuts or constraints, including in connection with the failure to increase or a delay in increasing the federal debt ceiling, could negatively affect us by leading to force reductions or cuts to services and tools that we or APUS’s students rely upon for recruitment, enrollment, access, and TA. Even temporary changes to military activity and budgets may adversely affect operations. 46 We will remain subject to the risk of events that occur within and with respect to the military, even where they do not directly relate to the use of TA. Because of APUS’s dependence on active-duty military students, changes that occur within and with respect to the military could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations. Continued declines in enrollments at RU could materially adversely affect RU’s and our profitability, financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows. RU has experienced continued declines in enrollments since the first quarter of 2022. We believe that unexpected leadership departures at RU during 2022 had a negative impact on the first half of 2023 and overall 2023 results of operations, including enrollments. Enrollments were further impacted by adverse findings by accrediting agencies and state regulatory bodies as a result of failures to meet applicable NCLEX benchmarks, self-imposed enrollment caps, the pause on new enrollments, and the closure of the program, with respect to the Bloomington, Minnesota ADN program, as discussed in greater detail in “Risks Related to the Regulation of Our Industry”. If enrollments continue to decline, RU’s and our reputation, profitability, financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows could be materially adversely affected. While we have identified, and continue to work to identify, new marketing strategies and other initiatives that we believe will attract and enroll quality students, there can be no assurance that these efforts will be successful. Changes our institutions may make to their operations to improve the student experience and enhance our institutions’ ability to identify and enroll students who are likely to succeed may adversely affect our institutions’ enrollment, profitability, financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows. We have identified, and continue to work to identify, potential changes and initiatives that we believe will more effectively attract and lead to the enrollment of students who are ready for and who are likely to persist in our institutions’ programs, support those students, and help improve their educational outcomes, including through changes to admissions, initiatives to increase the level of engagement and collaboration in the classroom and strengthen the bond with students, the establishment of a Council for Nursing Excellence at RU, and changes to curriculum and course retake policies at RU and HCN. Additional initiatives have included and may in the future include the following: • further revising admissions standards and requirements; • additional updates to the admissions process and procedures; • implementing more stringent satisfactory academic progress standards; • changing tuition costs and payment options; and • altering our institutions’ marketing efforts to target the appropriate prospective students. These initiatives require significant time, energy, and resources, and may adversely impact our institutions’ business, financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows, particularly in the near term. We may not succeed in achieving our objectives due to organizational, operational, regulatory, resource, or other constraints. If our efforts are not successful, we may experience reduced enrollment, increased expense, or other impacts on our business that materially and adversely impact our results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition. Even if these initiatives successfully lead to the identification and enrollment of students who are likely to succeed and to improvements in student experience, they could result in adverse impacts on enrollments. Due to the many factors that can impact enrollments, we may not appropriately identify the cause of any adverse impacts, and therefore may not be able to appropriately modify our initiatives to address such impacts. If our institutions are unable to successfully adjust to future market demands by updating and expanding the content of existing programs and developing new programs, specializations, and modes of teaching on a timely basis and in a cost-effective manner, our performance may be impaired. We believe that our institutions need to continuously update and expand the content of their existing programs and develop new programs, specializations, and modes of teaching in order to continue to attract and retain qualified students and remain competitive in the postsecondary education market. However, the updates and expansions of our institutions’ existing programs and the development of new programs and specializations may not be accepted by accreditors, state and federal regulators such as ED, existing or prospective students, or employers. If we cannot respond to changes in market requirements, our business may be adversely affected. Even if our institutions are able to develop acceptable new programs, they may not be able to introduce these new programs as quickly as students require or as quickly as competitors introduce competing programs. To offer a new academic program, our institutions may be required to obtain appropriate federal, state, and accrediting agency approvals, which may be conditioned or delayed in a manner that could significantly affect our growth plans. In addition, growth restrictions may be imposed on our institutions in connection with changes in ownership or otherwise that adversely impact our ability to adjust to future market demands. For example, including due to the change in control from APEI’s acquisition of RU, 47 RU is currently subject to ED-imposed restrictions on new programs and locations and on the number of students receiving Title IV who can be enrolled at RU. Additionally, state-imposed constraints exist on enrollment in Minnesota, Illinois, and Kansas. These restrictions will limit or adversely affect RU’s growth opportunities, including restricting its ability to serve additional students, particularly additional nursing students, and limiting its ability to continue to evolve to address current needs by providing new or modified programs. If we are unable to respond adequately to changes in market requirements due to financial constraints, regulatory limitations, or other factors, our institutions’ ability to attract and retain students could be impaired and our financial results could suffer. Establishing new academic programs, specializations, and modes of teaching or modifying or eliminating existing programs requires our institutions to make investments in management, academic resources including faculty, and capital expenditures, incur marketing expenses, and reallocate other resources. Our institutions may have limited experience providing courses in new fields of study or new modes of teaching (including non-degree credentials) and may need to modify systems and strategies or enter into arrangements with other institutions and organizations to provide new programs effectively and profitably. If our institutions are unable to establish new academic programs, increase the number of students enrolling in new academic programs, offer programs in a cost-effective manner, hire faculty to administer new programs or deliver specialized instruction, or otherwise manage effectively the operations of those programs, our results of operations and financial condition could be adversely affected. Continued strong competition in the postsecondary education market could decrease our institutions’ market share and increase our cost of acquiring students. Within the postsecondary education market, our institutions compete primarily with not-for-profit public and private two-year and four-year colleges, as well as other for-profit schools. Public institutions receive substantial government subsidies, and public and private not-for-profit institutions have access to government and foundation grants, tax-deductible contributions, and other financial resources generally not available to for-profit schools. These institutions may have instructional and support resources, or course delivery tools, that are superior to those of our institutions and other for-profit schools. Many of these competitors, whether for-profit, not-for-profit, or public, may also be able to leverage their greater scale, size, name recognition, and financial and other resources to compete for potential students, or to provide instructional and support resources that may be superior to those of our institutions and other for-profit schools. In addition, as indicated in the Risk Factor that begins “Strong competition in the military market...” below, the Armed Forces have established, and may in the future establish, their own postsecondary education programs. Within the nursing education market, we compete with other schools offering similar programs, including for-profit and not-for-profit public and private colleges, that may have greater resources or a greater market presence or reputation in the local areas we serve. In addition, because of the relatively local focus of RU’s and HCN’s nursing programs, our competitive environment is impacted by various factors that are specific to the particular areas where our campuses are located, including local supply and demand dynamics for our programs, nurses, and nursing schools. RU’s and HCN’s results are therefore more susceptible to the actions of single competitors than the results of an institution that draws from a broader geographical area. For example, a particularly effective or ineffective marketing approach by another school, or the opening or closing of another school, could have unanticipated detriments or benefits to RU’s and HCN’s competitive position. Within the postsecondary education market generally, we have experienced increased competition from new market entrants providing both online and non-traditional programs, including providers partnering with Online Program Management, and a shift of for-profit institutions to not-for-profit status. We operate 30 on-ground campuses in approximately 20 markets where we compete with a mix of local career colleges and two- and four - year colleges. Because of the relatively local focus of these programs, our competitive environment is impacted by various factors that are specific not only to states where campuses are located but also to the particular areas where the campuses are located, including local supply and demand for nurses and nursing schools. In the fall of 2023, there was an industry-wide increase of approximately 2.1% in undergraduate enrollment for the first time since the beginning of the pandemic, as compared to an overall industry-wide enrollment decline of 0.7% in the fall 2022. Longer term projections suggest that previous growth in enrollment in postsecondary degree-granting institutions is slowing. The combination of reduced growth or declines in the postsecondary student population and the entrance of additional providers in the online postsecondary education market will further intensify competition, and any resulting decline in the number of enrollments could have an adverse effect on our results of operations. In addition, increased competition for college-ready students has led to an increase in the cost of advertising in certain marketing channels. Continued increases in the cost of advertising may adversely impact our ability to attract college-ready students and/or increase our student acquisition costs. We expect to continue to face greater competition from non-traditional offerings, provided by both educational institutions and non-traditional providers. Competing institutions and others provide non-traditional education programs without charge or at low costs, including CBE programs, coding bootcamps, micro-credentialing, massive open online courses, and other flexible and individualized 48 programs. We believe that our institutions will continue to face new competition from non-traditional programs, including lower cost programs. We offer or are working to develop our own alternatives in some of these areas. However, these efforts may not be successful. Other institutions have programs that are more fully developed, and our offerings may not be as successful, broad or large enough or receive market acceptance. Our institutions may not be able to compete successfully against current or future competitors and may face competitive pressures that could adversely affect their business or results of operations. Increased availability of federal student financial aid for CBE programs could create additional competition and drive additional students toward non-traditional education programs. These factors could cause our institutions’ enrollments, revenue, and profitability to decrease significantly. Strong competition in the military market could decrease our institutions’ market share and increase our cost of acquiring students. We anticipate that APUS will continue to see strong competition within the military market, which continues to be a primary market for APUS. There are a number of for-profit schools and not-for-profit institutions that focus on the military market because of the size of the market and the availability of funding, and some for-profit schools seek to attract students eligible for TA, VA education benefits, or both. Some of these institutions may develop relationships with the military and education service officers that are stronger than APUS’s, which could have an adverse effect on APUS’s ability to attract and retain qualified students, and ultimately, on our financial condition. In addition, the Armed Forces have established, and may in the future establish, their own postsecondary education programs. For example, in January 2022, the Department of the Navy, in cooperation with the U.S. Marine Corps, Coast Guard, and Coast Guard Reservists, expanded a pilot program for online courses at the United States Naval Community College, or the USNCC, a community college supporting naval education for enlisted service members, with over 1,100 students enrolled into targeted associate’s degree and certificate programs with partner colleges and universities. The pilot program was completed on September 30, 2023 and a published report on the outcome is scheduled to be reported in early 2024. The USNCC has now entered the initial operating phase with approximately 2,600 students and anticipate being fully operational in 2028. While a number of schools with which APUS competes participate in this program, APUS as a for-profit institution, is not an eligible partner. Other Armed Forces branches may also begin offering distance learning through their own institutions. Tuition and fee increases at RU, APUS, and HCN have had, and could have an adverse impact on enrollment, our financial condition and our results of operations. RU implemented tuition increases, effective January 2023, for select programs, APUS implemented tuition and fee increases for its non-military and veteran students in the second and third quarters of 2023, and HCN implemented a 5% increase in tuition and fees effective in the second quarter of 2023 across all programs. These increases were implemented to help offset the increased cost of delivering a quality, competitive education. However, higher tuition and fees could cause potential students to be unwilling, or unable, to enroll at our institutions and/or in affected programs, and existing students may be unwilling, or unable, to remained enrolled, which would result in lower enrollments at our institutions and adverse impacts on our financial condition and results of operations. Risks Related to the Regulation of Our Industry If we or our institutions fail to comply with the extensive regulatory requirements for the operation of postsecondary education institutions, we and our institutions could face penalties and significant restrictions on operations, including loss of federal student loans and grants and access to DoD TA programs. We and our institutions are regulated by (i) accrediting agencies, (ii) state regulatory bodies, and (iii) the federal government through ED. Our institutions are also subject to DoD and VA oversight because our institutions participate in TA and veterans’ education benefits programs administered by the VA. Regulations, standards, and policies of these agencies affect the vast majority of our operations, including our educational programs, facilities, instructional and administrative staff, administrative procedures, marketing, recruiting, and financial operations and condition. These regulatory requirements can also affect our ability to acquire new institutions, open new locations, add new or expand existing educational programs, change our corporate structure or ownership, and make other substantive changes related to our Company. Compliance with these requirements increases our cost of operations. Findings of noncompliance with these laws, regulations, standards, and policies could result in any of the respective regulatory agencies taking certain actions, including: imposing monetary fines, penalties, or injunctions; limiting operations, including restricting our institutions’ ability to offer new programs of study or to open new locations, or imposing limits on our growth; limiting or terminating our ability to grant degrees; restricting or revoking our institutions’ accreditation, licensure, or 49 other approval required to operate; limiting, suspending, or terminating our institutions’ eligibility to participate in Title IV programs, TA, or VA education benefit programs; requiring us to repay funds, post a letter of credit, or become subject to payment methods for Title IV programs that are not the advance payment system; subjecting us to civil or criminal penalties; or other actions that could have a material adverse effect on our business. See also the Risk Factor that begins “Government and regulatory agencies and third parties…” below. If one of our institutions were to lose its eligibility to participate in Title IV, TA, or VA education benefit programs, or if the amount of available funds under these programs were reduced, we could seek to arrange or provide alternative sources of revenue or financial aid for students. Although we believe that one or more private organizations would be willing to provide financial assistance to students attending our institutions, there is no assurance that this would be the case, and the terms of such financial aid might not be as favorable as those for funds under the Title IV, TA, or VA education benefit programs. We may be required to guarantee all or part of such alternative assistance or might incur other additional costs in connection with securing alternative sources of financial aid. Accordingly, the loss of our eligibility to participate in these programs, or a reduction in the amount of available federal student financial aid, would be expected to have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations, even if we could arrange or provide alternative sources of revenue or student financial aid. The regulations, standards, and policies of ED, state regulatory bodies, and our institutions’ accrediting agencies change frequently and are subject to interpretive ambiguities. Recent and pending changes in, or new interpretations of, applicable laws, regulations, standards, or policies, or our noncompliance with any applicable laws, regulations, standards, or policies, could have a material adverse effect on our accreditation, authorization to operate in various states, permissible activities, receipt of funds under TA, ability to participate in Title IV programs, ability to participate in VA education benefit programs, or costs of doing business. We cannot predict with certainty how these regulatory requirements will be applied or whether we will be able to comply, or will be deemed by others to have complied, with all of the requirements. In addition, in some circumstances of noncompliance or alleged noncompliance, we may be subject to lawsuits under the federal False Claims Act, similar state false claim statutes, or various “whistleblower” statutes. These lawsuits in some cases can be prosecuted by a private plaintiff in respect of some action taken by us, even if ED or another regulatory body does not agree with the plaintiff’s theory of liability, or the government can intervene and become a party to the lawsuit. These lawsuits have the potential to generate significant financial liability linked to our receipt of government funds, including Title IV funds and TA funds. Noncompliance or alleged noncompliance may also result in derivative litigation or litigation involving other stakeholders. Any such litigation could result in substantial costs and a diversion of our management’s attention and resources. If our institutions fail to maintain their institutional accreditation, they would lose the ability to participate in Title IV and DoD TA programs and our student enrollments would decline. Accreditation at the institutional level by an accrediting agency recognized by ED is necessary to participate in Title IV and TA programs. Our institutions’ accrediting agencies may impose restrictions on their accreditation or may terminate their accreditation. To remain accredited, our institutions must continuously meet certain criteria and standards relating to, among other things, performance, governance, institutional integrity, educational quality, faculty, administrative capability, resources, and financial stability. Our institutions also must comply with accrediting agency policies and requirements, such as the requirements to apply and wait for approval before making certain changes. For example, as it did with the Rasmussen Acquisition, HLC requires approval before the closing of a transaction in order for an institution to maintain accredited status after closing. Failure to meet accreditation criteria or standards or to comply with accreditation policies and requirements could result in the loss of accreditation at the discretion of the accrediting agency. The complete loss of institutional accreditation at one of our institutions would, among other things, render the institution and its students ineligible to participate in Title IV and TA programs, and have a material adverse effect on our enrollments, revenue, and results of operations. In addition, loss of Title IV participation would result in loss of TA and VA participation. The standards of accrediting agencies that accredit our institutions and programs can and do vary, and accreditation agencies may prescribe more rigorous standards than are currently in place. Complying with more rigorous accreditation standards could require significant changes to the way we operate our business and increase our administrative and other costs. No assurances can be given that our institutions or programs would be able to comply with more rigorous accreditation standards in a timely manner or at all. If one of our institutions or programs does not meet its accreditation requirements, its accreditation could be limited, modified, suspended, or terminated. Failure to maintain institutional accreditation would make our institutions ineligible to participate in Title IV and TA programs, which could have a material adverse effect on the institution’s student enrollment and revenue. In addition, accrediting bodies may adopt new or revised criteria, standards, and policies that are intended to monitor, regulate, or limit the growth of our programs or for-profit institutions like ours. 50 Colleges and universities depend, in part, on accreditation in evaluating transfers of credit and applications to graduate schools. Many institutions will only accept transfer credit from institutions with certain institutional accreditation. Students and sponsors of tuition reimbursement programs look to accreditation for quality assurance, and employers rely on institutions’ accredited status when evaluating a candidate’s credentials. In addition, certain of our programs are accredited by programmatic accrediting agencies or recognized by professional organizations. If our institutions fail to satisfy the standards of these programmatic accrediting agencies and professional organizations, the relevant programs could lose the programmatic accreditation or professional recognition, which could result in materially reduced student enrollments in those programs and have a material adverse effect on us. In addition, in certain cases, professional licensure will not be granted if an applicant for licensure earned the relevant educational credential from an institution or educational program that lacks institutional or programmatic accreditation. Failure to obtain or maintain programmatic accreditation or professional recognition for certain programs could prevent our students from seeking and obtaining licensure or employment, result in materially reduced student enrollments in affected programs, and have a material adverse effect on us. If one or more of our institutions does not comply with the 90/10 Rule for two consecutive years, it or they will lose eligibility to participate in federal student financial aid programs. The HEA requires all for-profit education institutions to comply with what is commonly referred to as the 90/10 Rule, which imposes sanctions on institutions that derive more than 90% of their total revenue on a cash accounting basis from Title IV programs and other federal educational assistance funds, as calculated under ED’s regulations. As more fully described in “Regulatory Environment–Student Financing Sources and Related Regulations/Requirements – Department of Education – Regulation of Title IV Financial Aid Programs – The ‘90/10 Rule,’” for fiscal years beginning on or after January 1, 2023, which for our institutions means the year ended December 31, 2023, federal educational assistance funds used to calculate the “90%” side of the ratio include Title IV funds and any other educational assistance funds provided by a federal agency directly to an institution or a student, including the federal portion of any grant funds provided by or administered by a non-federal agency, except for non-Title IV federal educational assistance funds provided directly to a student to cover expenses other than tuition, fees, and other institutional charges. ED confirmed that the 90/10 Rule no longer permits institutions to count federal aid for veterans and service members as part of the “10%” side of the ratio. As a result, effective January 1, 2023, TA and VA benefits are included in the “90%” side of the ratio, and our institutions’ 90/10 Rule percentages increased, particularly at APUS. While each of our institutions was in compliance with the 90/10 Rule for 2023, with APUS’s relevant percentage for 2023 being 89%, there is no assurance that we will continue to be able to comply in future years, particularly at APUS. As a result of the problems with TA discussed in further detail in the Risk Factor that begins “Our student registrations, revenue, and cash flow have been adversely impacted...” below, cash payments from the Army to APUS that were expected in 2021 and 2022 were received in 2023, which together with recent modifications to the 90/10 Rule and enrollment growth among service members as compared to declines in students who use non-federal educational assistance funds caused APUS’s 90/10 Rule percentage to increase. As of December 31, 2023, approximately $22.3 million, of which $12.7 million is older than 60 days from the course start date, was due from the Army, as compared to $26.0 million due from the Army as of December 31, 2022, of which $16.5 million was older than 60 days from the course start date. If we are unable to collect aged amounts due from the Army, this may cause our bad debt to increase. Moreover, the delayed invoicing discussed below may cause the “90%” side of the ratio to increase in 2024 or future years, which could have an adverse impact on our cash flow and results of operations, as well as APUS’s ability to comply with the 90/10 Rule in 2024 or future years. In September 2023, APUS changed its approach to invoicing for TA to offset the effect of the receipt of the delayed payments from the Army due to ArmyIgnitED system issues. APUS is currently taking longer to bill TA, which had the effect of delaying into 2024 payments for TA that ordinarily would have been received in 2023. We estimate that APUS’s change in billing approach resulted in approximately $22.1 million of receivables that we would have expected to receive in 2023 being received in 2024. While the change in billing approach positively impacted the “90%” side of the ratio in 2023, it may cause the “90%” side of the ratio to increase in 2024 or future years. In addition to the $22.1 million of receivables received in 2024 due to the change in billing timing, in 2024 we expect to bill the Army and collect $4.0 million outstanding from courses that began in 2022 and prior. In January 2024, APUS separately revised its billing policy for students utilizing TA from two weeks to five weeks after course start date to nine weeks after the course start date. Billed accounts receivable are considered past due if the invoice has been outstanding for more than 30 days. The change in billing practice also added to our accounts receivable as of December 31, 2023 and resulted in an increase to our leverage ratios as of December 31, 2023 under our Credit Agreement and the purchase agreement for the shares of Series A Senior Preferred Stock, as described in Notes 9 and 13 to our audited consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2023. See the discussion below under “Our Series A Senior Preferred Stock provides rights, preferences, and privileges that are not held by our common stockholders, and is senior to our common stock, which could adversely affect our cash flows, liquidity, and financial condition” for a discussion of the impact on our leverage ratio. While we do not anticipate 51 that a higher leverage ratio will have material limitations on our expected operations for 2024, it could result in reduced operational flexibility in 2024 and future years. In addition, given the recent modifications of the 90/10 Rule, we also anticipate more general scrutiny of practices and compliance with the 90/10 Rule across the industry. As noted in the Risk Factor with the caption beginning “Government and regulatory agencies and third parties...”, ED is currently conducting a regular program review at APUS, which includes, among other things, a review of APUS’s compliance with the 90/10 Rule. APUS has not yet received a program review report from ED, and accordingly, at this time we cannot predict whether ED could have further feedback or findings on APUS’s 90/10 Rule compliance and related practices, whether as a result of the program review or otherwise. We cannot predict whether Congress or ED will continue to modify the 90/10 Rule with respect to relevant sources of funds or other aspects of the calculation. For example, in recent years Congress has considered various other proposals that would modify the 90/10 Rule, including proposals to decrease the limit on Title IV funds from 90% to 85%. Such proposals, or other similar legislation, should they become law, could have a material adverse impact on the operations of our institutions. In addition, at least one state has passed, and other states may in the future pass, their own versions of the 90/10 Rule that like the new federal 90/10 Rule include TA and VA education benefits or other sources of funds in the “90%” side of the ratio. To the extent that any additional laws or regulations are adopted that further limit or condition the participation of for-profit schools or distance education programs in TA or in Title IV programs, or that further limit or condition the amount of TA for which for-profit schools or distance education programs are eligible to receive, our financial condition and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected. For the past three years, RU has derived less than 80% and HCN has derived more than 80% of its total revenue on a cash accounting basis from Title IV programs and, as applicable, other federal educational assistance funds as calculated under ED’s modified regulations. If our institutions are unable to attract students who do not depend on Title IV program aid or TA or VA benefits, such as students who finance their own education or receive full or partial tuition reimbursement from non-government employers, their 90/10 Rule percentage may increase. While each of our institutions was in compliance with the 90/10 Rule for 2023, we expect continued challenges with compliance with the 90/10 Rule, particularly at APUS. Enrollments at APUS from students who use TA funds have been trending upward, while enrollments from students who use non-federal educational assistance funds continued to decline. This is making it more difficult to satisfy the 90/10 Rule at APUS. In order to try and address the challenges with respect to 90/10 at APUS, we may pursue strategic transactions, including business combinations and acquisitions. Those transactions may not be successful or could cause disruption to our operations. For examples of some of the challenges that some types of strategic transactions could have, see the Risk Factor that starts with “Business combinations and acquisitions may be difficult to integrate …” below. If any of our institutions fails to satisfy the 90/10 Rule and loses eligibility to participate in Title IV programs, it would also lose the ability to participate in TA because DoD requires institutions to participate in Title IV programs in order to participate in TA, and ineligibility of either or both of our institutions to participate in Title IV programs and TA would have a material adverse effect on our enrollments, revenue, results of operations, and cash flows. Similarly, failure of one of our institutions to meet the 90/10 Rule for any fiscal year would require the institution to notify ED and students of this failure, would result in the institution being on provisional status for two fiscal years, could subject the institution to heightened regulatory scrutiny and possible adverse regulatory action, and could damage the institution’s reputation, which would have a material adverse impact on our results of operation, cash flow, and financial condition. Failure of an institution to meet the 90/10 Rule for two consecutive fiscal years results in the institution becoming ineligible to participate in Title IV programs for at least two fiscal years, which would have a material adverse impact on our results of operation, cash flow, and financial condition. DoD’s MOUs impose extensive regulatory requirements on our institutions with respect to participation in DoD TA programs, and our revenue and number of students would decrease if our institutions were no longer able to receive funds under DoD TA programs or if TA is reduced, eliminated, or suspended. As described in “Regulatory Environment – Student Financing Sources and Related Regulations/Requirements – Department of Defense” and “Regulatory Environment – Compliance with Regulatory Standards and the Effect of Regulatory Violations – Compliance Reviews”, each institution participating in TA is party to an MOU in a similar form outlining certain commitments and agreements in connection with accepting funds from TA. For example, the MOUs include an agreement to participate in the ICP in order to participate in TA. An institution that is found noncompliant with DoD requirements through the ICP and demonstrates an unwillingness to resolve a finding may be subject to a range of penalties from a written warning to termination of the institution’s participation in TA. 52 The DoD MOUs also provide that an institution may only participate in TA if it is accredited by an accrediting agency recognized by ED, approved for VA funding, and a participant in Title IV programs. Failure to comply with an MOU could result in an institution losing its ability to participate in TA. We also believe that in certain circumstances DoD may impose sanctions for a failure to comply instead of denying an institution the ability to participate in TA, including restricting student enrollment in TA programs, suspending an institution from enrolling new students, limiting access to military installations, subjecting the institution to heightened compliance oversight, or otherwise limiting an institution’s ability to participate in TA. If an institution fails to comply with the requirements of an MOU, it could result in sanctions, up to losing the ability to participate in TA, that could have a significant adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition. Students participating in TA constituted approximately 48% of APUS’s adjusted net course registrations for 2023. We do not know the scale or nature of future actions that may be taken with respect to TA, which could include eliminating those programs, reducing the funds, benefits, or level of reimbursement available thereunder, changing the eligibility criteria for beneficiaries, enacting new restrictions on institutional participation, or imposing other eligibility criteria on institutions, all of which could impact enrollments from service members. Other administrative changes to DoD programs could also have negative effects on our enrollments. There have been previous changes to eligibility requirements under TA that have impacted us, and additional changes that impact us could occur in the future. Additional changes to TA could occur due to Congressional action or DoD policy and funding changes. For example, the failure of Congress to pass appropriations legislation has limited the release of funds at times in the past and could do so in the future as well, including as a result of budget disputes related to the federal debt ceiling. Annual TA funding is limited and could be exhausted in any given year due to budget constraints or changes in demand or policy. We are unable to predict whether and to what extent the Armed Forces will impose limitations on TA approvals in the future as a result of limited funding. Furthermore, we expect each military branch and the DoD to continually evaluate their approaches to education, including by launching or expanding their own institutions, as discussed in further detail in the Risk Factor that begins “Strong competition in the military market...” below, and such actions could have an impact on the funds available to service members to pursue their education at our institutions. Changes in funding allocations could have a material adverse effect on APUS’s enrollments. If we are no longer able to receive funds from TA, or if those programs are modified, reduced, eliminated, or temporarily suspended, our enrollments, revenue, and cash flow could be significantly reduced, which would result in a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition. See also the Risk Factor captioned “Our student registrations, revenue, and cash flows have been adversely impacted and we could continue to experience adverse impacts as a result of the Army’s transition to new systems for soldiers to request TA” below. HLC has scheduled a comprehensive site visit for APUS for its mid-cycle review in year four of its ten-year accreditation cycle instead of a panel review. HLC will conduct a focused visit at APUS in March 2024 after HLC raised potential concerns regarding APUS’s compliance with standards related to program development oversight and program assessment processes as a result of certain courses not being available for students in one program. Pursuant to HLC policy, APUS has transitioned from the Open Pathway to the Standard Pathway because of the decision to conduct a focused visit. As a result of this transition, APUS will be subject to a comprehensive site-visit for the year four mid-cycle review under the Standard Pathway, currently scheduled in the spring of 2025. The reaffirmation of accreditation site visit date remains unchanged and will take place 2030-2031. HLC’s focused visit will result in a written report addressing the topics of concern identified in the letter calling for the focused visit. The focused visit team report will include a recommendation to accept the report or may call for additional monitoring, sanction, show-cause order, or withdrawal of accreditation. Although APUS would have the opportunity to respond prior to any HLC action on the report, we cannot be sure that the HLC team will not identify deficiencies at APUS during the focused visit or call for negative accreditation-related action against APUS as a result. ED’s recently finalized new gainful employment requirements could materially and adversely affect our business after they take effect. Pursuant to new gainful employment, or GE, regulations, that will take effect July 1, 2024, ED will determine the Title IV eligibility of GE programs based in part on satisfaction of specified performance levels of two measures defined by the GE regulations: the debt-to-earnings rates (which include two rates, the discretionary debt-to-earnings rate and the annual debt-to-earnings rate) and the earnings premium measure. ED previously released a data set, referred to as the program performance data, or the PPD, that includes calculations of the two metrics for certain programs. The methodology ED used to produce the PPD differs from the methodology that will be used under the final GE regulations, primarily due to data limitations. However, 53 out of the 30 RU programs, 47 APUS programs, and three HCN programs (including one no longer offered at HCN) that ED assessed in the PPD, six current RU programs and three APUS programs failed one or both of the new measures. The six RU programs failing in the PPD represent 8.5% of total student enrollment for the three months ended December 31, 2023. The three APUS programs failing in the PPD represent 2.1% of total net course registrations for the three months ended December 31, 2023. Programs that fail to satisfy the specified performance levels of the GE measures in two of any three successive years for which the debt-to-earnings rates or the earnings premium measure are calculated would lose access to Title IV funding. Under the GE regulations, the failure of any of our institutions’ programs to satisfy the required specified performance levels could adversely impact those institutions and programs. We expect that the earliest a program could lose eligibility is July 1, 2026. In addition, programs that fail any of the metrics in a year will be required to warn enrolled and prospective students that the program risks losing access to Title IV funding. At this time, it is difficult to predict whether our institutions’ programs will satisfy performance levels of future GE metrics, including whether the programs identified as failing in the PPD will in fact fail or whether other programs will fail or pass. Failure to improve certain of our programs’ NCLEX pass rates and to more generally satisfy NCLEX requirements could reduce our enrollments, revenue, and cash flow, lead to adverse actions taken by state boards of nursing, and limit our ability to offer educational programs. The majority of RU’s graduates, HCN graduates, and certain APUS graduates seek professional licensure, employment or other outcomes in their chosen fields following graduation, particularly in nursing. Their success in obtaining these outcomes depends on numerous factors, including individual merits of the graduate, whether the institution and the program were approved by the state in which the graduate seeks licensure, or by a professional association, whether the program meets all state requirements for professional licensure, and the accreditation of the institution and the specific program. As discussed more fully in “Regulatory Environment – State Authorization/Licensure”, failure to satisfy NCLEX pass rate requirements imposed by state boards of nursing can result in the state boards of nursing and other regulators taking certain adverse actions, including placement of a program on provisional approval status or withdrawal of approval pursuant to an adjudication proceeding, and NCLEX exam pass rate requirements could limit our institutions’ ability to expand into new geographies. A number of programs at certain RU campuses and in certain states, including its Bloomington and Moorhead, Minnesota, Fort Myers, Florida, Ocala, Florida, Tampa/Brandon, Florida, and Illinois, and Kansas ADN programs and its Moorhead, Minnesota PN program, as well as HCN’s Ohio ADN program, have not met state-established first-time NCLEX benchmarks for consecutive years. As described more fully in “Regulatory Environment – State Authorization/Licensure – State Authorization/Licensure of Our Institutions”, as a result, regulators and accreditors have in some cases placed these programs on probationary or similar status or required them to take corrective action, including limiting, or taking action that has the effect of limiting, enrollment. We believe that low pass rates may be the result of a number of factors, including without limitation the academic preparedness of our students, curriculum gaps, changes in the mode of course delivery including the use of virtual courses, testing failures and inconsistencies, imbalances in enrollment and resources, and changes in admission standards. We are taking action aimed at improving NCLEX pass rates and meeting related standards, but there can be no assurance that we have accurately identified the underlying reasons for low pass rates or that our efforts to improve these pass rates will succeed in a timely fashion, if at all. Significant changes to the NCLEX were effective in April 2023. While the average scores at RU and HCN both increased, there were also increases nationwide, and the ultimate impact of the change in the NCLEX is still uncertain, including because NCLEX regulatory thresholds could change. In addition, merely being subject to disciplinary, probationary, or similar status or requirements could make it more difficult to improve NCLEX pass rates or meet other applicable standards, such as by damaging our reputation and making it more difficult to recruit students who are likely to succeed. Any voluntary, required, or other reduction in enrollment will have an adverse impact on our revenue. In February 2023, the Florida Board of Nursing, or FBN, placed RU’s Fort Myers, Florida ADN program on probation until its pass rate reaches the applicable threshold for a calendar year. RU is required to disclose this status to active and prospective students. If the program fails to achieve the required NCLEX pass rate within two years following placement on probation, FBN may extend the program’s status for a year if the program is demonstrating progress toward achievement. However, absent further extension or achievement of the required rate by the end of the extension, Florida law provides that FBN shall terminate the program. In February 2024 FBN also placed RU’s Ocala, Florida and Tampa/Brandon, Florida ADN programs on probation – a status that must be disclosed to active and prospective students – until the programs’ pass rates reach the applicable threshold for a calendar year. RU was required to present an action plan to FBN on February 7, 2024, detailing benchmarks to measure progress toward achieving the required NCLEX pass rate. In January 2024, legislation that would significantly overhaul the regulation of Florida nursing programs in ways that could materially adversely impact RU’s Florida ADN and PN programs was introduced in the Florida senate, but at this time there can be no assurance that the legislation will be enacted as drafted or at all. 54 Although variability in regulator and accreditor approach to and use of discretion in enforcement of NCLEX pass rate standards makes it difficult to predict consequences, failure to abide by the terms of any restrictive status placed on these programs, take appropriate corrective action, or reach applicable threshold rates within a required timeframe could subject impacted programs to additional adverse action, including withdrawal of approval, and we could take voluntary action to curtail or terminate affected programs, any of which would have an adverse effect on our results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition. Even if the affected programs have long-term success in complying with NCLEX pass rate standards, the actions we take to comply could result in increased costs or decreased enrollments, and impairment of RU or HCN goodwill. Recently introduced Florida legislation, if enacted, could have a material adverse impact on RU’s Florida ADN and PN programs. In January 2024, legislation was introduced in the Florida senate that would significantly overhaul the regulation of Florida nursing programs. If enacted, this legislation could materially adversely impact RU’s Florida ADN and PN programs. At this time, it is uncertain whether the legislation will be attached to another bill, enacted as drafted, or enacted at all. RU’s planned closure of the Bloomington, Minnesota ADN program effective June 2024 may adversely impact RU and us. RU’s Bloomington, Minnesota ADN program has been subject to adverse action and heightened scrutiny from regulators as a result of a continued failure to meet applicable regulatory and accreditor requirements. In September 2021, ACEN placed conditions on the Bloomington, Minnesota ADN program’s continued accreditation, requiring it to demonstrate compliance with all applicable accreditation criteria within two years. In June 2023, ACEN’s site visit team recommended denial of continuing accreditation for the program based on the team’s findings that the program did not demonstrate compliance with certain accreditation criteria related to student outcomes despite RU’s belief that good cause existed not to deny continuing accreditation. ACEN notified RU in October 2023 that the ACEN board had granted continuing accreditation for good cause until September 2024. ACEN also requested a follow-up report for good cause be submitted in advance of a follow-up visit in spring 2024 related to student outcomes criteria. In addition with the planned spring 2024 follow-up visit, the ACEN board notified RU that it plans to conduct a focused visit due to a complaint received by ACEN related to student clinical preparation and graduate clinical performance. In August 2023, RU decided to voluntarily pause new enrollments beginning in November 2023. On December 29, 2023, RU informed the MBN that it intends to voluntarily close the Bloomington, Minnesota ADN program, effective June 15, 2024. The MBN approved the voluntary closure of the Bloomington, Minnesota ADN program at its February 1, 2024 meeting. For all students enrolled in the Bloomington, Minnesota ADN program graduating after June 2024, their enrollment record will be transferred to RU’s St. Cloud, Minnesota ADN. However, there can be no assurance that any or all remaining students in the program will find the St. Cloud transfer suitable. Due to previous self-imposed enrollment caps and the pause on new enrollments, enrollment in this program currently represents less than 2% of RU’s current total enrollment. As RU evaluates its other campuses and programs, it could make similar closure decisions about other programs or campuses. The closure of the Bloomington, Minnesota ADN program, or any closure of other programs or campuses, may have an adverse impact on RU’s enrollments and reputation, which could further impact RU’s enrollments operations, cash flows, and financial condition. RU’s Illinois ADN program has been adversely impacted by regulatory action, including as a result of the failure to meet applicable NCLEX pass rates, and further action by regulators and accreditors could result in additional adverse impacts. RU’s Illinois ADN program has not met state-established first-time NCLEX benchmarks for three consecutive years. In February 2022, RU’s Illinois ADN program was placed on probationary status by the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation, or IDFPR, as a result of which RU is required to temporarily reduce admitted students in the program by 25% and has two years to demonstrate evidence of implementing strategies to correct deficiencies and satisfy the required NCLEX pass rate. In August 2023, the State of Illinois enacted legislation, which took effect January 1, 2024, that provides programs with additional time to improve NCLEX pass rates. The legislation changed the Illinois NCLEX pass rate requirements from a one-year measurement based on first attempts only to a three-year average that includes all test attempts and removed all nursing programs, including RU’s Illinois ADN program, from probationary status for a period of three years. However, there can be no assurance that they will not seek to impose different or additional requirements in connection with this change in legislation. Furthermore, there can be no assurance that any resulting removal from probationary status of RU’s Illinois ADN program will be viewed favorably by ACEN or another nursing program accreditor or would result in RU’s Illinois ADN program obtaining ACEN accreditation following the February 2024 site visit. An Illinois statute also requires nursing programs in the state to have achieved accreditation by the end of 2022 in order to meet state approval requirements. RU’s Illinois ADN program has been in candidacy status for initial accreditation with 55 ACEN since July 2020. Although the IDFPR has indicated that candidacy status satisfies this requirement, the IDFPR could change its position. ACEN will not grant accreditation to a program on probationary status with the IDFPR, as RU’s Illinois ADN program is. The current candidacy is set to expire in July 2024. If ACEN ultimately denies initial accreditation and RU is unable to obtain accreditation or candidacy status with another national nursing accrediting body, RU would likely have to close the Illinois ADN program. Removal from probationary status pursuant to the newly enacted Illinois legislation described above may be viewed favorably by ACEN or another nursing program accreditor and may result in RU’s Illinois ADN program obtaining ACEN accreditation following a site visit in February 2024. However, there is no assurance that this legislation will benefit RU’s Illinois ADN program as anticipated or that the program will meet the new NCLEX pass rate requirements. The inability of our institutions’ graduates to obtain professional licensure, employment or other outcomes in their chosen fields of study, particularly in nursing, could reduce our enrollments and revenue, limit our ability to offer educational programs, and potentially lead to litigation that could be costly to us. As explained in the Risk Factor that begins with the caption “Failure to improve certain of our programs’ NCLEX pass rates...”, the majority of RU’s graduates, HCN graduates and certain APUS graduates seek professional licensure, employment or other outcomes in their chosen fields following graduation, particularly in nursing. State requirements for licensure are subject to change, as are professional certification standards, and we may not become aware of changes that may impact our students in certain instances. In addition, as further discussed in “Regulatory Environment – State Licensure/Authorization - Federal Requirements for State Authorization/Licensure - State Authorization and Professional Licensure”, new ED regulations will require institutions that offer postsecondary education programs leading to employment in an occupation that requires licensure or certification to meet certain additional requirements in order for those programs to maintain eligibility to participate in Title IV programs. In each state in which the institution is located, in which students enrolled in distance education are located, or where a student enrolled after July 1, 2024 attests that they intend to seek employment, the program must satisfy the applicable state education requirements for professional licensure or certification so that a student seeking employment may qualify to take any licensure or certification exam needed to practice or find employment in the state. In the event that one or more states refuse to recognize our institutions’ students for professional licensure based on factors relating to our institutions or programs, the potential and actual growth of our institutions’ programs would be negatively impacted, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows. Further, requirements for employment vary from employer to employer and from field to field. To the extent our graduates fail to satisfy requirements for employment by particular employers or in a particular profession based on characteristics of our programs, the ability to maintain enrollments, as well as the potential for growth of our institutions’ programs would be negatively impacted, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows. In addition, if our institutions’ graduates fail to obtain professional licensure, employment, or other outcomes in their chosen fields of study, we and our institutions could be exposed to litigation, including class-action litigation, claiming that we are at fault for such failure, which would force us to incur legal and other expenses that could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows. A failure of HCN to satisfy ABHES accreditation standards, including specific student achievement indicators, could have a material adverse impact on HCN’s student enrollment, revenue, results of operations, and cash flows. ABHES annually reviews student achievement indicators, including retention rate, placement rate, and licensing and credentialing examination pass rate. Under ABHES policy, ABHES may withdraw accreditation at any time if it determines that an institution fails to demonstrate at least a 70% retention rate for each program, a 70% placement rate for each program, and a 70% first-time pass rate on mandatory licensing and credentialing examinations or fails to meet the state-mandated results for credentialing or licensure. Alternatively, ABHES may in its discretion provide an opportunity for a program to come into compliance within a period of time specified by ABHES, and ABHES may extend the period for achieving compliance if a program demonstrates improvement over time or for other good cause. In prior years, several HCN programs at certain HCN campuses have failed to satisfy ABHES’ student achievement measures, and as a result, ABHES has placed certain locations and programs on program-specific warning or outcomes reporting status and required action plans. As a result of retention rates being below the 70% benchmark for the 2021-2022 reporting year, which was the second consecutive full reporting year, ABHES placed the PN programs at the Cincinnati, Cleveland, Columbus, and Dayton campuses on program-specific warning status in January 2023. Toledo PN and Akron ADN program retention rates fell below the 70% benchmark for the 2021-2022 reporting year, which was the first full reporting year. As a result of failing to meet the threshold benchmark, ABHES required HCN to submit reports for each of these programs demonstrating their retention rate through the first three quarters of the 2022-2023 reporting year by May 2023. 56 The reports submitted in response to this requirement demonstrated that the PN programs at the Cincinnati, Cleveland, Columbus, and Dayton campuses and the ADN program at the Akron campus were above the 70% retention benchmark through the first three quarters of the 2022-2023 reporting year. As a result, the Cincinnati, Cleveland, Columbus, and Dayton PN programs were removed from program-specific warning status, and ABHES informed HCN that no additional information was required for the ADN program at the Akron campus. However, HCN reported that the retention rate for the PN program at the Toledo campus was below the 70% benchmark through the first three quarters of the 2022-2023 reporting year. Consequently, the Toledo PN program was placed on outcomes reporting status, and required to provide an additional report and action plan in October 2023, which HCN submitted. For the reporting year ended June 30, 2023, the PN program at the Cleveland, Columbus, Dayton, and Toledo campuses, as well as the ADN program at the Akron and Dayton campuses, were below the 70% benchmark for retention. As a result, ABHES continued the Toledo PN program on outcomes reporting status, due to its retention rate falling below the 70% benchmark. ABHES is also requiring additional reporting for the Cleveland PN, Columbus PN, Dayton PN, and Akron ADN programs. In conjunction with these actions, ABHES is requiring HCN to submit reports for each of these programs demonstrating their retention rate through the first three quarters of the 2023-2024 reporting year by May 2024. If the Cleveland PN, Columbus PN, Dayton PN, Dayton ADN, and Akron ADN programs do not meet the 70% retention benchmark by the third quarter of the 2023-2024 reporting year, ABHES will likely place these programs on outcomes reporting status. If the Toledo PN program does not meet the 70% retention benchmark by the third quarter of the 2023-2024 reporting year, ABHES will likely place the program on program-specific warning status. If ABHES places any HCN program on program-specific warning status, and ABHES determines that HCN’s response to the program-specific warning status is insufficient, it could take action that could have an adverse impact on our results of operations, cash flow, and financial condition, including limiting program enrollment, suspending program enrollment and new starts until HCN meets terms and conditions established by ABHES, or withdraw approval for one or more programs. HCN is also required to disclose the program-specific warnings to current and prospective students, which could adversely affect HCN’s reputation and enrollments. If any HCN campus or program fails to satisfy ABHES achievement measures, enrollment in such HCN campus or program could decline, or we could be forced to cease enrollments at that campus or in that program, which could have a material adverse impact on HCN’s student enrollment and our and HCN’s revenue, results of operations, and cash flows. The actions HCN takes to comply with ABHES requirements may not be successful in resolving existing issues and, if those actions are targeted at specific campuses or programs, they may fail to prevent additional issues arising with respect to those or other campuses or programs. Similarly, even if HCN is successful in the long term in complying with these standards, the actions HCN takes to comply could result in increased costs or decreased enrollments, and impairment of HCN goodwill. More generally, any institutional or programmatic accreditor may have policies or standards related to specific student achievement indicators that, if not met, may result in our institutions experiencing adverse actions, up to and including withdrawal of accreditation for certain programs. Such outcomes could have an adverse impact on our ability to enroll students and eventually our ability to continue certain programs, any of which would have an adverse effect on our results of operations, cash flow, and financial condition. If our institutions fail to maintain state authorization in the states where they are physically located, the institutions would lose their ability to grant degrees and other credentials in that state and to participate in Title IV programs and DoD TA programs. As discussed in “Regulatory Environment – State Licensure/Authorization”, to participate in Title IV programs and TA, an institution must be legally authorized by the relevant education agency of the state in which its main campus is physically located. Loss of state authorization by one of our institutions in the state in which its main campus is physically located would render that institution ineligible to participate in Title IV programs, and therefore also TA and VA, to be unable to operate in the state and grant credentials, and to lose institutional accreditation. If one of our institutions were to lose state authorization as to a non-main campus location, it would be unable to award Title IV aid to students at that location, and it would be unable to operate at that location. ED regulations provide that an institution is considered legally authorized by a state if the state has a process to review and appropriately act on complaints concerning the institution, including enforcing applicable state laws, and the institution complies with any applicable state approval or licensure requirements. If a state in which one of our institutions is located fails in the future to satisfy the provisions of that regulation, our institutions’ ability to operate in that state and to participate in Title IV programs could be limited or terminated. 57 Our institutions’ failure to comply with the requirements of SARA or regulations of ED or various states related to state authorization could result in actions that would have a material adverse effect on our enrollments, revenue, and results of operations. Various states impose regulatory requirements on educational institutions operating within their boundaries, including registration requirements applicable to online education institutions that have no physical location or other presence in the state but offer educational services to students who reside in the state or advertise to or recruit prospective students in the state. As described more fully in “Regulatory Environment – State Licensure/Authorization” and “Regulatory Environment – State Authorization/Licensure”, APUS and RU must comply with the requirements of California, which is the only state that does not participate in SARA, and APUS, RU, and HCN must comply with SARA, with regard to the interstate offering of postsecondary distance education and online education. Those requirements may change from time to time and, in some instances, are ambiguous or are left to the interpretative discretion of state regulators. Changes in requirements to participate in SARA or changes to state laws and regulations and the interpretation of those laws and regulations may limit our ability to offer education programs and award degrees. If one of our institutions were to fail to comply with such requirements, the institution could lose its ability to participate in SARA or may be subject to the loss of state licensure or authorization to provide distance education. If one of our institutions were to fail to comply with state requirements to obtain licensure or authorization, it could also be subject to injunctive actions or penalties. We cannot predict the extent to which states will retain membership in SARA, the manner in which SARA’s rules may be modified, interpreted, and enforced, our institutions’ ability to comply with SARA’s requirements and retain eligibility, or the impact that failure to meet the SARA requirements may have on our business. As more fully described in “Regulatory Environment – State Licensure/Authorization”, our institutions are subject to regulations that, among other things, clarify the required methodology for determining the state in which a student is located for purposes of satisfying state authorization requirements for distance education courses and require an institution to disclose certain information related to whether programs leading to professional licensure meet applicable state requirements, regardless of program modality. Failure to make the disclosures required by these regulations could put us at risk of administrative enforcement action or related litigation, including claims from students related to misrepresentation and other matters. In addition, we cannot predict whether, or to what extent, such disclosure requirements will have an effect on our enrollment processes and results. Our institutions must periodically seek recertification to participate in Title IV programs, and may, in certain circumstances, be subject to review by ED prior to seeking recertification, and our future success may be adversely affected if our institutions are unable to successfully maintain certification or obtain recertification. As more fully described in “Regulatory Environment – Student Financing Sources and Related Regulations/Requirements – Department of Education – Regulation of Title IV Financial Aid Programs – Eligibility and Certification Procedures”, APUS, RU and HCN must periodically seek recertification from ED, and ED may review our institutions’ eligibility and certification to participate in Title IV programs, or the scope thereof. If our institutions are unable to successfully maintain certification or obtain recertification to participate in ED’s Title IV programs, they will not be able to participate in TA because each DoD MOU requires an institution to be certified to participate in Title IV programs in order to participate in TA. Similarly, an institution is required to be certified to participate in the Title IV programs in order to be eligible to participate in the VA education benefits programs. Loss of participation in Title IV programs, TA, and the VA education benefits programs would have a material adverse effect on our enrollments, revenue, results of operations, and financial condition. In addition, also as more fully described in “Regulatory Environment – Student Financing Sources and Related Regulations/Requirements – Department of Education – Regulation of Title IV Financial Aid Programs – Eligibility and Certification Procedures”, ED must in some cases provisionally certify an institution, which imposes additional conditions on the institution’s receipt of Title IV funds. For example, APUS and RU are currently provisionally certified with ED. As more fully described in the Risk Factor that begins “RU is currently on provisional certification with ED...” below, the PPPA, entered into by RU and ED in connection with the Rasmussen Acquisition continues restrictions that ED imposed as a result of RU’s March 2019 change in ownership, including an enrollment cap on students who participate in Title IV. In June 2020, APUS timely applied for recertification to participate in Title IV programs. ED subsequently notified APUS that it had completed its review of APUS’s application and had granted APUS provisional certification until June 30, 2023 because APUS was subject to an open program review at the time of renewal. That program review was closed in January 2021 with no findings, penalties, or further action required. APUS applied for recertification on March 23, 2023. APUS’s recertification application is still pending and APUS remains on provisional certification. In June 2021, HCN timely applied for certification to participate in Title IV programs. ED subsequently notified HCN that it had been granted provisional certification 58 for all Title IV programs until September 30, 2023. As described in the PPPA, ED granted approval on a provisional basis because HCN was subject to an open program review at the time of certification. As described in “Regulatory Environment – Compliance with Regulatory Standards and Effect of Regulatory Violations – Compliance Reviews,” in July 2022, HCN received a final program review determination from ED, and in September 2022, ED notified HCN that it had closed the program review and no further action was required though the provisional designation remained. In June 2023, HCN again timely applied for recertification. ED subsequently notified HCN that it had been granted non-provisional participation in all Title IV programs effective August 15, 2023 and expiring June 30, 2026. Our institutions’ failure to meet financial responsibility standards may result in additional regulatory requirements that may negatively impact cash flow or the loss of eligibility by one of our institutions to participate in Title IV programs. To participate in Title IV programs, an eligible institution must satisfy specific measures of financial responsibility prescribed by ED or post a letter of credit in favor of ED, and possibly accept other conditions, such as provisional certification, additional reporting requirements, or regulatory oversight of its participation in Title IV programs. As described in “Regulatory Environment – Student Financing Sources and Related Regulations/Requirements – Department of Education – Regulation of Title IV Financial Aid Programs – Financial Responsibility”, ED’s annual evaluations for compliance with financial responsibility standards include a composite score calculation based on line items from an institution’s audited financial statements. Generally, an institution’s composite score must be at 1.5 or above for the institution to be deemed financially responsible. Under certain circumstances, institutions with a composite score less than 1.5 may be able to establish financial responsibility on an alternative basis by complying with various conditions. A composite score between 1.0 and 1.4 is considered by ED to be in the “zone”, and the “zone alternative” permits institutions to demonstrate financial responsibility by meeting specific monitoring requirements. For purposes of evaluating the financial responsibility of our institutions, including the composite score calculation, we supply consolidated financial statements to ED because ED does not review each of our institution’s financial statements separately. Failure to meet ED’s financial responsibility standards or being subject to zone alternative requirements could adversely affect our results of operations and our operations. As described more fully in “Regulatory Environment – Student Financing Sources and Related Regulations/Requirements – Department of Education – Regulation of Title IV Financial Aid Programs – Financial Responsibility”, on March 4, 2024, ED notified us that according to its calculations, we had a 2022 consolidated composite score of 1.1 and our institutions were therefore in the “zone.” Although we disagree with ED’s calculation and conclusion and plan to submit a rebuttal to ED, ED may not agree with our position. If ED does not agree with our position, we intend to comply with the zone alternative requirements, under which we would be required to: (i) make Title IV disbursements to eligible students and parents under the heightened cash monitoring payment method, or HCM1, pursuant to which we would be required to first make disbursements to eligible students and parents and pay any credit balances before we request or receive funds from ED for the amount of those disbursements; (ii) notify ED of certain events, such as an adverse action taken by any of our institution’s accreditors or state authorizing agencies; (iii) provide regular reports to ED relating to our institution’s current operations and future plans; and (iv) require our auditors to express an opinion on our compliance with the requirements under the zone alternative. A determination that we are in the zone could also result in additional adverse regulatory and accreditor requirements and actions, including with respect to SARA eligibility. If the respective SARA portal agency for APUS, RU, or HCN were not to renew the institution’s approval due to a low composite score, we would need to obtain approval or exemptions in states in which the affected institution offers distance education programs or discontinue the affected institution’s offerings to students in such states. In addition, some states have adopted financial standards that are similar to ED’s composite score, which means an affected institution may be unable to obtain licensure in that state if it were to lose SARA participation. And, because composite scores are viewed as a measure of financial responsibility, other regulators or accreditors could more generally consider a composite score that is in “zone” negatively, which could have an impact on their interactions with us and what they permit us to do. An obligation to post a letter of credit, or to accept other conditions, such as a change in our system of Title IV payment from ED for purposes of disbursement, as a result of not meeting financial responsibility standards, could increase our costs of regulatory compliance, or affect our cash flow. As discussed in “Regulatory Environment – Student Financing Sources and Related Regulations/Requirements – Department of Education – Regulation of Title IV Financial Aid Programs – Financial Responsibility”, prior to its acquisition by us, RU’s financial ratios failed to meet ED’s standards of financial responsibility. In May 2021, RU posted a letter of credit with ED totaling $23.1 million, which represents 10% of the Title IV program funds received by RU during its most recently completed fiscal year as of that time. Additionally, RU is required to make Title IV disbursements to eligible students and parents under HCM1 and provide monthly and bi-weekly financial and enrollment reporting to ED. The 2019 Borrower Defense Regulations identify certain conditions or other triggering events that have or may have an adverse material effect on the institution’s financial condition, in response to which ED would or could require that the 59 institution submit some form of financial protection to ED. For more on the financial responsibility provisions of the Borrower Defense Regulations, please refer to “Regulatory Environment – Student Financing Sources and Related Regulations/Requirements – Department of Education – Regulation of Title IV Financial Aid Programs – Borrower Defenses”. If, under the 2019 Borrower Defense Regulations, ED determines that one of our institutions is not financially responsible because of one or more triggering events, the institution would be required to provide an irrevocable letter of credit equal to at least 10% of the amount of federal student financial aid funds received by the institution for the past year. ED recently released a final rule modifying and expanding the current financial responsibility, administrative capability, and certification regulations, which takes effect July 1, 2024. Under the modified regulations, institutions will be required to meet additional financial responsibility criteria and must report certain “financial responsibility” events to ED. Such financial responsibility events include certain mandatory and discretionary triggers that capture financial circumstances that may not be reflected in an institution’s financial statements, including instances where an institution faces a potential loss of Title IV funding. Under the new rule, if ED determines that an institution has 90/10 Rule violations, high borrower default rates, or certain pending legal and administrative actions, it will require the institution to post “financial protection”. ED may also require the institution to post financial protection if it determines that certain discretionary triggers may have an adverse effect on the financial condition of the institution, such as pending accrediting agency or government agency actions, high annual dropout rates, or pending borrower defense claims. If ED requires financial protection as a result of more than one mandatory or discretionary trigger, ED will require separate financial protection for each individual trigger. In addition to financial protection, ED may require institutions that fail to meet these financial responsibility criteria to participate in Title IV programs under a provisional certification. ED may also impose additional requirements on the institution’s participation in Title IV programs, such as restrictions on enrollment, addition of new programs, or acquisitions. If one of our institutions is found not to have satisfied ED’s financial responsibility requirements, it could be limited in its access to, or lose, Title IV program funds, which would limit our potential for growth and adversely affect our enrollment, revenue, and results of operations. If we, as the parent company of an eligible institution, are found not to have satisfied ED’s financial responsibility measures, all of our institutions could be limited in their access to, or lose, Title IV program funds, which would limit our potential for growth and adversely affect our enrollment, revenue, results of operations, and financial position. For more on the financial responsibility requirements, please refer to “Regulatory Environment – Student Financing Sources and Related Regulations/Requirements – Department of Education – Regulation of Title IV Financial Aid Programs”. A failure to demonstrate “administrative capability” may result in the loss of eligibility to participate in Title IV programs. ED’s regulations specify extensive criteria that an institution must satisfy to establish that it has the requisite administrative capability to participate in Title IV programs and the sanctions ED may impose if an institution fails to satisfy any of those criteria. These criteria relate to, among other things, institutional staffing, operational standards such as procedures for disbursing and safeguarding Title IV program funds, timely submission of accurate reports to ED, referring to ED OIG credible information that a student or employees with Title IV responsibilities may have engaged in fraud or illegal conduct in connection with Title IV program administration, and various other procedural matters. ED may find that an institution has failed the administrative capability requirements if the institution does not provide adequate financial aid counseling or career services, has been subject to a negative action by a state or federal agency, court, or accreditor, fails to verify high school diplomas, or does not timely place students in geographically accessible clinical or externship opportunities. If an institution fails to satisfy any of the administrative capability requirements, ED may require the repayment of Title IV program funds, transfer the institution from the “advance” system of payment of Title IV program funds to heightened cash monitoring status, or to the “reimbursement” method of payment, place the institution on provisional certification status, or commence a proceeding to impose a fine or to limit, suspend, or terminate the participation of the institution in Title IV programs, which would adversely affect our enrollment, revenue, results of operations, and financial condition. For more on the financial responsibility provisions of the Borrower Defense Regulations, please refer to “Regulatory Environment – Student Financing Sources and Related Regulations/Requirements – Department of Education – Regulation of Title IV Financial Aid Programs – Administrative Capability”. ED rules related to BDTR claims may create significant liability that could have an adverse effect on our business and results of operations. Under the HEA, ED is authorized to specify in regulations which acts or omissions of an institution of higher education a borrower may assert as a defense to repayment of a loan under the Direct Loan Program, or a Direct Loan. As more fully described in “Regulatory Environment – Student Financing Sources and Related Regulations/Requirements – Department of Education – Regulation of Title IV Financial Aid Programs – Borrower Defenses”, ED may initiate a proceeding to collect from an institution the amount of relief resulting from a borrower defense brought by an individual borrower. If ED determines that borrowers of Direct Loans (or Direct Consolidation Loans made after July 1, 2023) who attended our institutions have a defense 60 to repayment of their Direct Loans, we could be subject to repayment liability to ED that could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows. However, the July 1, 2023 effective date of the 2022 Borrower Defense Regulations is currently enjoined nationwide by court order, so we cannot predict whether the final regulations will result in regulatory changes that would harm our business. As a result of the 2022 Borrower Defense Regulations injunction, ED announced that while it will not adjudicate any borrower defense applications under the 2022 Borrower Defense Regulations unless and until the effective date is reinstated, it will continue to adjudicate borrower defense applications under the 2016 Borrower Regulations and 2019 Borrower Defense Regulations if required pursuant to a court ordered settlement. In 2022, ED joined a class settlement agreement that would result in a blanket grant of automatic, presumptive relief for all BDTR applications filed by students at certain institutions through June 22, 2022, but our institutions were not included in the blanket grant of relief. The class settlement agreement would also provide certain expedited review of borrower defense claims related to institutions excluded from the automatic relief list, as well as for borrowers who applied during the period after execution of the settlement and before final approval. Borrowers had to have submitted an application by November 15, 2022 in order to receive expedited review. In December 2023, RU received from ED 338 BDTR claims, all of which were dated between June 23, 2022 and November 15, 2022, for students attending RU between 2000 and 2022, seeking in the aggregate a discharge of approximately $6.1 million in loans. In December 2023, HCN received from ED 77 BDTR claims, all of which were dated between June 23, 2022 and November 15, 2022, for students attending HCN between 2007 and 2022, seeking in the aggregate a discharge of approximately $1.4 million in loans. RU and HCN dispute the validity of these claims and have filed responses to them with ED. We are unable to predict whether ED will grant BDTR relief for the claims, or if so, whether it will seek recoupment from RU and/or HCN. However, if in the future our institutions are subject to ED recoupment actions, our business, reputation, enrollments, and financial condition may be adversely impacted. While we have not received any claims with respect to APUS at this time, we believe is it reasonably likely that we will receive claims in the future. BDTR regulations, among other issues, are more fully described in “Regulatory Environment – Student Financing Sources and Related Regulations/Requirements – Department of Education – Regulation of Title IV Financial Aid Programs – Borrower Defenses”. The postsecondary education regulatory environment has changed and may change in the future as a result of U.S. federal elections. Changes in Presidential administrations and control of Congress as a result of the outcome of elections or other events could result in changes in or new legislation, appropriations, regulations, standards, policies and enforcement actions that could materially affect our business, including material consequences for our institutions’ accreditation, authorization to operate in various states, permissible activities, receipt of funds under student financial assistance programs, and cost of doing business. For example, as a result of the 2020 U.S. federal elections, Democrats, who tend to support more regulation of and restrictions on for-profit institutions, gained control of the executive branch and both houses of Congress, and as a result of the 2022 U.S. federal midterm elections, Democrats retained control of the Senate and lost control of the House of Representatives. The Biden administration and 2020 Congress have acted and may continue to act to change or eliminate education-related legislation and ED regulations, and to enact new legislation, such as legislation to reauthorize the HEA, and ED has initiated and could initiate new rulemaking processes to alter existing regulations and could act to change existing ED policies and practices with respect to matters related to postsecondary education institutions. For example, ARPA, which modifies the HEA’s 90/10 Rule to require that a for-profit institution derive not less than 10 percent of its revenue from sources other than “federal education assistance funds”, was enacted in 2021, and ED has issued final regulations to address the 90/10 Rule and other topics. ED also issued final regulations to address BDTR, public service student loan forgiveness programs, mandatory pre-dispute arbitration, and prohibition of class-action lawsuits, among other issues. We cannot predict the extent to which the Biden administration and Congress, or any future administration or Congress, will act to change or eliminate or to implement new laws, regulations, standards, policies, and practices, nor can we predict the form that new laws, regulations, standards, policies, or practices may take or the extent to which those regulations, practices or policies may impact us or our institutions. A failure by our institutions to comply with ED’s incentive payment rule could result in sanctions and liability under the False Claims Act. If one of our institutions pays a bonus, commission, or other incentive payment in violation of the HEA’s prohibition on such payments, commonly referred to as the incentive payment rule, the institution could be subject to sanctions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. If ED determines that one of our institutions violated the incentive payment rule, it may require the institution to modify its payment arrangements to ED’s satisfaction. ED may also fine the institution or initiate action to limit, suspend, or terminate the institution’s participation in Title IV programs. ED may also seek to recover Title IV funds disbursed in connection with the prohibited incentive payments. As described in “Regulatory Environment – Student Financing Sources and Related Regulations/Requirements – Department of Education – Regulation of Title IV Financial Aid 61 Programs – Incentive Payment Rule”, changes in the interpretation of this prohibition may create uncertainty about what constitutes impermissible incentive payments and errors in the implementation of our compensation programs and arrangements may also lead to impermissible payments. Ambiguities as to how the incentive payment rule is interpreted also may influence our approach, or limit our alternatives, with respect to employment policies and practices and consequently may negatively affect our ability to recruit, retain, and motivate employees. DoD MOUs requires that institutions participating in TA have policies in place that are compliant with regulations issued by ED related to restrictions on incentive payments. In addition, the Johnny Isakson and David P. Roe, M.D. Veterans Health Care and Benefits Improvement Act of 2020 bans incentive payments based on success in securing enrollments or financial aid with regard to VA benefits. In addition, third parties may file “qui tam” or “whistleblower” suits on behalf of the federal government under the federal False Claims Act alleging violation of the incentive payment rule. Such suits may prompt ED investigations, and the federal government may determine to intervene in the lawsuits. Particularly in light of the uncertainty surrounding interpretation of the incentive payment rule, the existence of, the costs of responding to, and the outcome of, such suits or ED investigations could have a material adverse effect on our reputation causing our enrollments to decline, could cause us to incur costs that are material to our business, and could impact the ability of our institutions to participate in Title IV programs, among other things. As a result, our business could be materially and adversely affected. Our institutions may lose eligibility to participate in Title IV programs if their student loan default rates are too high, and our future growth could be impaired as a result. As described more fully under “Regulatory Environment – Student Financing Sources and Related Regulations/ Requirements – Department of Education – Regulation of Title IV Financial Aid Programs – Student Loan Defaults” and “ – Cohort Default Rate”, if the cohort default rate for any year exceeds 40% in any single year, or exceeds 30% for three consecutive years, an institution loses eligibility to participate in Title IV programs. If an institution’s cohort default rate equals or exceeds 30% for any given year, it must establish a default prevention task force and develop a default prevention plan with measurable objectives for improving the cohort default rate. Government policies to minimize the adverse economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic have artificially lowered our institutions’ cohort default rates, which nevertheless may be higher than otherwise expected as a result of the pandemic. Congress and ED implemented a temporary freeze on student loan payments and interest accruals, which means borrowers are less likely to default on their loans and our institutions’ cohort default rates are lower not because borrowers are making timely repayments but because the government is allowing them not to make payments. In June 2023, the Fiscal Responsibility Act was enacted, ending the freeze on payments and interest accruals. Accordingly, interest accrual on federal student loans resumed on September 1, 2023 and payments became due beginning October 1, 2023, which may lead to an increase in defaults and therefore an increase in our institutions’ cohort default rates. ED has announced a 12-month “on-ramp” to repayment, running from October 1, 2023 to September 30, 2024, so that financially vulnerable borrowers who miss monthly payments during this period will not be considered delinquent, reported to credit bureaus, placed in default, or referred to debt collection agencies. ED has also announced other actions intended to provide debt relief and support for student loan borrowers, such as instituting a new income-driven repayment plan. However, there can be no assurance that our institutions’ cohort default rates will benefit from these efforts, and the eventual end of the “on-ramp” period may also lead to an increase in defaults. If one of our institutions loses its eligibility to participate in Title IV programs because of high student loan default rates, students would no longer be eligible to use Title IV program funds at that institution, which would significantly reduce that institution’s enrollments and revenue and cash flows and have a material adverse effect on our results of operations. In addition, if Congress or ED restricts permitted types of default prevention assistance, the default rates of our former students may be negatively impacted. Congress could also increase the measuring period, which could also negatively impact student default rates. We rely on third parties to administer elements of APUS’ and HCN’s participation in Title IV programs and their failure to perform services as agreed or to comply with applicable regulations could cause us to lose our eligibility to participate in Title IV programs. ED’s regulations permit an institution to enter into a written contract with a third-party servicer for the administration of any aspect of the institution’s participation in Title IV programs. The third-party servicer must, among other obligations, comply with Title IV requirements and be jointly and severally liable with the institution to ED for any violation by the servicer of any 62 Title IV provision. An institution must report to ED new contracts with or any significant modifications to contracts with third-party servicers and other matters related to third-party servicers. If any third-party servicer that we have engaged does not comply with applicable statutes and regulations, our institutions may be liable for its actions, and our institutions could lose eligibility to participate in Title IV programs. The failure of one of our third-party servicers to perform the services as agreed may adversely impact our ability to operate, our eligibility to participate in Title IV programs, and our financial condition. Further, in the event that our institutions transition to or from a third-party servicer for any of its services, there would be costs and risks related to the transition, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition. As discussed in “Regulatory Environment – Student Financing Sources and Related Regulations/Requirements – Department of Education”, ED recently issued and subsequently retracted guidance that would have significantly expanded the types of activities and functions that constitute third-party servicer activities for Title IV purposes and stated ED’s position that an institution may not contract with a third-party servicer for Title IV purposes if the servicer (or its subcontractors) is located outside the U.S. or is owned or operated by an individual who is not a U.S. citizen or national or a lawful U.S. permanent resident. In a November 2023 press release, ED indicated that it intends to issue updated guidance in early 2024. with an effective date at least six months after its publication. Once final guidance is published, our institutions must assess their arrangements with third parties to determine whether a vendor must now be treated as a third-party servicer based on the guidance, and such assessment may lead to a need to modify or end existing contracts and establish new contracts. Any transition by our institutions to or from a third-party servicer for any services as a result of the new guidance could be costly and present other risks related to the transition, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. Our institutions will be subject to sanctions that could be material to our results and damage our reputation if ED determines that our institutions failed to correctly calculate and timely return Title IV program funds for students who withdraw before completing their educational program. As more fully described in “Regulatory Environment – Student Financing Sources and Related Regulations/Requirements – Regulation of Title IV Financial Aid Programs – Title IV Return of Funds”, an institution participating in Title IV programs must calculate unearned Title IV program funds that have been disbursed to students who withdraw from their educational programs before completion and must timely return those funds. Under ED regulations, late returns of Title IV program funds for 5% or more of students sampled in connection with the institution’s annual Title IV compliance audit constitute material noncompliance for which an institution generally must submit an irrevocable letter of credit. Our institutions’ failure to comply with ED’s substantial misrepresentation rules could result in material sanctions. As more fully described in “Regulatory Environment – Student Financing Sources and Related Regulations/Requirements – Regulation of Title IV Financial Aid Programs – Substantial Misrepresentation”, ED may fine, suspend or terminate the participation in Title IV programs by an institution that engages in substantial misrepresentation regarding the nature of its education program, its financial charges, or the employability of its graduates. If administrative actions or litigation claiming substantial misrepresentation were brought against our institutions, we could incur legal costs related to their investigation and defense, which could materially and adversely impact our financial condition. Enforcement of laws related to the accessibility of technology continues to evolve, which could result in increased information technology development costs and compliance risks. Our institutions make certain course content available to students through personal computers, mobile devices, and other technological devices. The curriculum makes use of a combination of graphics, pictures, videos, animations, sounds, and interactive content. We also communicate to both the general public and our enrolled students through our websites, which also triggers accessibility requirements under federal law. Federal agencies, including ED and the Department of Justice, have considered or are considering how electronic and information technology should be made accessible to persons with disabilities, including via specific technical standards. For example, as discussed further in “Regulatory Environment – Department of Education – Regulation of Title IV Financial Aid Programs – Accessibility for Students and Disabilities”, ED’s Office for Civil Rights, or OCR, has in recent years taken enforcement action against higher education institutions in connection with the inaccessibility of their websites and online learning management platforms to persons with a disability. In 2022, OCR initiated a random compliance review of APUS’s learning management system and courses. At this time, we cannot predict the outcome of the compliance review or when it will be completed, whether there will be any adverse findings in the resulting compliance review, or whether OCR will place any liability or other limitations on APUS as a result of the compliance review. 63 As a result of such enforcement action or as a result of new laws and regulations that require greater accessibility or accessibility in accordance with specific technical standards, our institutions may have to modify their online classrooms and other uses of technology to satisfy applicable requirements, which could require substantial financial investment. As with all nondiscrimination laws that apply to recipients of federal financial assistance, an institution may lose access to federal financial assistance if it does not comply with Section 504 requirements. In addition, private parties may file or threaten to file lawsuits alleging failure to comply with laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of disability, such as the class action complaint APUS received in July 2020 regarding its website accessibility that settled in September 2020, and defending against such actions may require our institutions to incur costs to modify their online classrooms and other uses of technology and costs of litigation. Government and regulatory agencies and third parties may conduct compliance reviews, bring claims, or initiate enforcement actions or litigation against us, any of which could disrupt our institutions’ operations and adversely affect their performance. Our institutions are subject to audits, compliance reviews, inquiries, complaints, investigations, claims of noncompliance, enforcement proceedings, and lawsuits by government agencies, regulatory agencies, students, employees, and third parties, including claims brought by third parties on behalf of the federal government. For example, ED regularly conducts program reviews of educational institutions that are participating in Title IV programs and ED OIG regularly conducts audits and investigations of such institutions. ED finalized a Title IV program review of RU in July 2023 and APUS is currently subject to an ongoing Title IV program review. In July 2023, ED began a program review of APUS’s administration of Title IV programs during the 2021-2022 and 2022-2023 award years that includes a review of compliance with the 90/10 Rule. At this time, we cannot predict the outcome of the APUS program review, when it will be completed, whether there will be any adverse findings in the resulting program review report, what findings there may be related to 90/10 Rule compliance, if any, or whether ED will place any liability or other limitations on APUS as a result of the review. In September 2022, RU received a program review report from ED with respect to the previously disclosed open program review for the 2015-2016 and 2016-2017 award years. ED asserted 14 findings of noncompliance with Title IV rules, including rules related to Title IV administration, policies, and consumer information and reporting requirements, and the federal work study, Pell Grant, and Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grant programs. The program review report required RU to do a review in connection with the federal work study finding, prepare policies and procedures, return small amounts of funds to two students, provide training, and take other actions in connection with the findings, and to provide a response, which RU timely provided. In July 2023, RU received a final program review report from ED in which ED found that all the findings of noncompliance with Title IV rules had been resolved with a total liability of approximately $4,200 including a de minimis amount of interest associated with the liability. In July 2022, HCN received from ED the final program review determination from a review that had been pending since June 2017, and in September 2022 ED notified HCN that it had closed the program review, and no further action was required. The review included findings of a failure to prorate fees, return of Title IV funds calculations that were not properly computed, untimely and inaccurate reporting to the National Student Loan Data System, incomplete verification, and cost of attendance formulation deficiencies. HCN was required to do a full file review in connection with the return of Title IV funds finding, to have the review tested by an independent auditor, and to prepare policies and procedures and take other actions in connection with the findings. Total liabilities were approximately $12,000. HCN notified all students and/or borrowers in writing regarding payments made on their behalf. HCN timely submitted the total payment to ED and in accordance with instructions provided. In addition, the FTC has investigated and, in some cases, brought lawsuits against for-profit institutions alleging that the institutions engaged in deceptive trade practices, and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has sued for-profit institutions for engaging in allegedly illegal predatory lending practices. In October 2021, in what it termed a broad-based initiative to deter for-profit college fraud, the FTC issued informational notices to 70 for-profit higher education institutions, including APUS and RU, informing them of certain marketing practices the FTC had previously determined to be deceptive or unfair and therefore unlawful under the FTC Act and thereby documenting that the institutions have knowledge that the FTC has found these marketing practices to be unfair or deceptive. APUS and RU were not specifically accused of wrongdoing. The FTC announced that it would be enhancing its enforcement cooperation with other agencies with oversight of educational institutions, including ED’s Office of Federal Student Aid and the Department of Veterans Affairs. Also in October 2021, ED announced that it had restored an Office of Enforcement within ED’s Office of Federal Student Aid to strengthen oversight of and enforcement actions against postsecondary institutions that participate in federal student loan, grant, and work-study programs. Any civil penalties or enforcement actions could have a material and adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. 64 If the results of compliance reviews or other proceedings are unfavorable to our institutions, or if they are unable to defend successfully against lawsuits or claims, our institutions may be required to pay monetary damages or be subject to fines, limitations, loss of Title IV funding, injunctions, or other penalties, including the requirement to make refunds. Even if our institutions adequately address issues raised by a compliance review or successfully defend a lawsuit or claim, we may have to divert significant financial and management resources from our ongoing business operations to address issues raised by those reviews or to defend against those lawsuits or claims. Claims and lawsuits brought against us or one of our institutions may result in reputational damage, even if such claims and lawsuits are without merit, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows and result in the imposition of significant restrictions on us and our institutions, which may materially adversely affect our ability to operate. Investigations by state Attorneys General, Congress, and governmental agencies may result in increased regulatory burdens and costs. We and other for-profit postsecondary education providers have been subject to increased regulatory scrutiny and litigation in recent years. State attorneys general have increasingly focused on allegations of improper recruiting, compensation, and deceptive marketing practices, among other issues. States may also have consumer disclosure laws, including laws specifically applicable to for-profit institutions, and a state attorney general may take the position that any such laws apply to institutions that offer wholly online education to students in the state. In recent years, a number of state attorneys general launched investigations into for-profit postsecondary education institutions. State attorneys general may also initiate inquiries into us or our institutions. Actions by state attorneys general and other governmental agencies, such as the recently restored Office of Enforcement within ED’s Office of Federal Student Aid, whether or not involving us or our institutions, could damage our reputation and the reputation of our institutions and limit the ability to recruit and enroll students, which could reduce student demand for our institutions’ programs and adversely impact our revenue and cash flow from operations. Our regulatory environment and our reputation may be negatively influenced by the actions of other for-profit institutions. Regulatory investigations and civil litigation brought against other for-profit education institutions have attracted adverse media and social media coverage, have been the subject of federal and state legislative hearings, and have in some cases resulted in legislation or rulemaking. In some cases, institutions have ceased operations, including while under multiple government investigations. Broader allegations against the overall for-profit school sector have negatively affected public perceptions of for-profit education institutions, including our institutions, and this trend could continue or broaden. In addition, reports on student lending practices of various lending institutions and schools, including for-profit schools, and investigations by a number of state attorneys general, Congress, and governmental agencies have led to adverse media and social media coverage of postsecondary and for-profit education. Adverse media or social media coverage regarding others in our industry, or regarding us or our institutions directly, could damage our reputation, could result in lower enrollments at our institutions, lower revenue, and increased expenses, and could have a negative impact on our stock price. Such allegations could also result in increased scrutiny and regulation by ED, Congress, accrediting bodies, state legislatures, state attorneys general, or other governmental authorities with respect to all for-profit institutions, including us and our institutions. For these reasons or others, not-for-profit or public education institutions may act to differentiate themselves from the for-profit education institutions, including by choosing not to enter into collaborations with for-profit institutions, including us, or by excluding for-profit institutions from membership in industry groups. Similarly, some corporations have chosen and may in the future choose not to collaborate with for-profit providers such as us for programs for their employees or for other training purposes. If we undergo a change in ownership or control, ED will place our institutions on provisional certification if they are not already on provisional status, and the terms of that provisional certification could limit our institutions’ potential for growth and adversely affect our institutions’ enrollment, our revenue, and results of operations. As described more fully under “Regulatory Environment – Regulatory Actions and Restrictions on Operations”, an institution whose parent undergoes a change in ownership resulting in a change of control loses its eligibility to participate in Title IV programs and must apply to ED in order to reestablish such eligibility. Future transactions could constitute a change in ownership or control under ED’s regulations and could cause ED to leave provisional certification in place for our institutions as required by the HEA. The conditions of provisional certification or heightened scrutiny by ED could impact, among other things, our institutions’ ability to add educational programs, or additional locations, our ability to acquire other institutions, or our ability to make other significant changes. For example, as described in “Regulatory Environment – Student Financing Sources and Related Regulations/Requirements – Department of Education – Regulation of Title IV Financial Aid Programs – Eligibility and Certification Procedures”, ED imposed growth restrictions on RU in connection with RU’s 2019 change in ownership and continued those restrictions after the Rasmussen Acquisition as part of RU’s temporary provisional certification. In addition, if ED were to determine that our institutions were unable to meet their responsibilities while they were provisionally certified, as 65 our institutions currently are, ED could seek to revoke our institutions’ certification to participate in Title IV programs with fewer due process protections than if they were fully certified. Limitations on our institutions’ operations could, and the loss of our institutions’ certification to participate in Title IV programs would, adversely affect our institutions’ enrollments, and our revenue and results of operations. See also the Risk Factor that begins “RU is currently on provisional certification with ED...” below. RU is currently on provisional certification with ED, and the terms of that provisional certification could limit its potential for growth. In July 2021, ED notified RU that in connection with its March 2019 change in ownership that preceded our acquisition of RU, ED imposed certain temporary growth restrictions on RU, including limitations on new programs and locations and a cap on enrollments by students that participate in Title IV programs. Additionally, ED required RU to submit periodic financial and enrollment reports, a requirement that it had imposed on RU in connection with a financial responsibility letter of credit previously imposed on RU. In connection with the Rasmussen Acquisition, RU timely submitted a change in ownership and control application to ED seeking approval to participate in the Title IV programs under our ownership and, effective October 2021, ED and RU entered into a TPPPA that allowed RU to continue disbursing Title IV funds while ED reviewed the change in ownership application. The TPPPA continued the growth restrictions imposed as a result of the previous change in ownership, with certain qualifications more fully described in “Regulatory Environment – Regulatory Actions and Restrictions on Operations” and “Student Financing Sources and Related Regulations/Requirements”. In August 2023, ED notified RU that it had approved RU’s continued participation in the Title IV programs under APEI ownership. In the PPPA that RU executed in connection with the approval, ED continues to impose certain growth restrictions on RU that were included in the TPPPA, including limitations on new programs and locations and an enrollment cap on the number of students that participate in Title IV programs. ED also continues to require RU to submit periodic financial and Title IV enrollment reports. The PPPA also imposes new reporting requirements related to accrediting agency actions, government actions, class actions and student complaints. The PPPA specifies that after ED reviews and accepts financial statements and compliance audits for one complete fiscal year of RU’s Title IV participation under APEI’s ownership, RU may seek removal of the enrollment cap and approval for new programs that replace current programs. The PPPA also specifies that at least until after ED reviews and accepts financial statements and compliance audits that cover the second complete fiscal year of RU’s Title IV participation under our ownership, RU must seek pre-approval for new locations, new programs that are not replacing current programs, and other changes. For the second and third fiscal years, RU is also subject to enrollment growth limitations, after which RU can request that ED release RU from further enrollment restrictions. The PPPA no longer requires RU to post the financial responsibility letter of credit that ED had imposed based on the 2019 change in ownership and control of RU, although this letter of credit has not yet been released. We believe we have met all obligations for the release of the letter of credit. These growth restrictions could limit or adversely affect RU’s growth opportunities, including restricting its ability to serve additional students, particularly additional nursing students. If regulators do not approve or delay their approval of transactions involving a change of control of our Company or of institutions that we own or acquire, our and our institutions’ ability to operate could be impaired. If we or one of our institutions experiences a change of ownership or control under the standards of applicable state regulatory bodies, accrediting agencies, ED, or other regulators, we or the institution governed by such agencies must notify or seek the approval of each relevant regulatory agency. Transactions or events that constitute a change of control include significant acquisitions or dispositions of an institution’s common stock, significant changes in the composition of an institution’s Board of Directors, internal restructurings, acquisitions of institutions including the Rasmussen Acquisition, or certain other transactions. Some of these transactions or events may be beyond our control. Our or our institutions’ failure to obtain, or a delay in receiving, approval of any change of control from the relevant regulatory agencies following a transaction involving a change of ownership or control could result in a suspension of operating authority, loss of accreditation, or suspension, loss of ability to participate in Title IV programs or certain growth restrictions including with respect to adding locations and programs, which could have a material adverse effect on our institutions and our financial condition. Our failure to obtain, or a delay in receiving, any approval of any change of control from other states in which we are currently licensed or authorized could require our institutions to suspend activities in that state or otherwise impair our institutions’ operations. The potential adverse effects of a change of control could influence, among other things, future decisions by us and our stockholders regarding the sale, purchase, transfer, issuance, or redemption of our stock. In addition, the regulatory burdens and risks associated with a change of control also could have an adverse effect on the market price of our common stock. Growth restrictions that ED could impose as a result of change in ownership are more fully described in “Regulatory Environment – Regulatory Actions and Restrictions on Operations” and “-Student Financing Sources and Related Regulations/Requirements”. 66 Congress has in the past changed, and may in the future change, eligibility standards and funding levels for federal student financial aid programs, DoD TA, and other programs. Other governmental or regulatory bodies may also change similar laws or regulations relating to such programs, which could adversely affect our student population, revenue, and financial condition. Title IV programs are made available pursuant to the provisions of the HEA. The HEA must be periodically reauthorized by Congress and each Title IV program must be funded through appropriations acts on an annual basis. The most recent comprehensive reauthorization occurred in 2008 when Congress reauthorized most HEA programs through the 2014 federal fiscal year. The reauthorization has been temporarily extended in the years that have followed. Congress previously considered comprehensive legislation to reauthorize the HEA, including proposals from Republicans and Democrats, referred to as the Student Aid Improvement Act and the College Affordability Act, respectively, and Congress could consider such legislation again in the future We cannot predict whether, in what form, or when, HEA reauthorization legislation will be enacted. Modifications to the HEA could occur as part of reauthorization, which could require us to modify our business practices and increase administrative costs, thereby negatively impacting our results of operations. Future Congressional action, including in reauthorizations or appropriations acts, may result in legislative changes that could adversely affect the ability of our institutions to participate in Title IV programs, TA, and the availability of such funding sources for our students. Members of Congress may propose legislation to alter or modify the terms under which our institutions participate in the federal student financial aid programs. Any action by Congress that significantly reduces funding for Title IV programs or the ability of our institutions or students to participate in these programs could materially harm our institutions’ business. A reduction in government funding levels could lead to lower enrollments at our institutions and require our institutions to arrange for alternative sources of financial aid for their students. Lower student enrollments at our institutions or their students’ inability to arrange alternative sources of funding could adversely affect our financial condition. Congressional action may also require our institutions to modify their practices in ways that could result in increased administrative and regulatory expenses. We are not in a position to predict the extent to which, or whether, Congress may focus on for-profit education institutions or whether any particular legislation that could adversely affect the for-profit education sector will be passed by Congress or signed into law in the future, but Democrats, who tend to support more regulation of and restrictions on for-profit institutions, currently control the executive branch of the U.S. government. The reallocation of funding among Title IV programs, material changes in the requirements for participation in such programs, or the substitution of materially different Title IV programs could reduce the ability of certain students to finance their education at our institutions and adversely affect our revenue and results of operations. Failure to comply with the various federal and state laws and regulations governing HCN’s extended payment plan option could subject us to fines, penalties, obligations to discharge loans and other injunctive requirements. HCN offers an extended payment plan option designed to assist students with educational costs, including tuition and fees. The extended payment plan is subject to various federal and state laws and regulations, as discussed in “Regulatory Environment – Student Financing Sources and Related Regulations/Requirements – Additional Sources of Student Payments”. If we do not comply with these laws and regulations, we could be subject to fines, penalties, obligations to discharge loans and other injunctive requirements, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows and result in the imposition of significant restrictions on us and our ability to operate. Additionally, an adverse allegation, finding or outcome in any of these matters could also materially and adversely affect our ability to maintain, obtain or renew licenses, approvals or accreditation and maintain eligibility to participate in Title IV programs or serve as a basis for ED to discharge certain Title IV student loans and seek recovery for some or all of its resulting losses from us, either of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and cashflows, and result in the imposition of significant restrictions on us and our ability to operate. Risks Related to Our Business Our student registrations, revenue, and cash flow have been adversely impacted and we could continue to experience adverse impacts as a result of the Army’s transition to new systems for soldiers to request TA. APUS relies on the ability of the Army, and the other branches of the Armed Forces, to process service members’ participation in TA programs, and from time to time, changes to processes have impacted the ability of service members to participate in those programs. For example, the Army in 2021 transitioned from its legacy system, GoArmyEd, to a new system, ArmyIgnitED, for soldiers to use to request TA. This transition was beset with delays and disruptions to the Army’s TA 67 programs. In connection with the transition, we experienced challenges related to system performance, process changes and third-party software defects, and there was an adverse impact on registrations and revenue, profits, and cash flow in the second and third quarters of 2021. Due to the transition, ArmyIgnitED does not currently reflect all courses previously taken by soldiers at APUS in the relevant period or all amounts due to APUS. Our efforts to work with the Army to resolve these discrepancies continue but may be unsuccessful. We could incur bad debt expense if the Army does not recognize and process payments for all courses taken by soldiers during this period, or if soldiers do not otherwise pay the tuition for courses not reimbursed through Army TA. In August 2022, the Army transitioned from the initial version of ArmyIgnitED to an upgraded ArmyIgnitED 2.0, with a new third-party service provider, and announced that all TA requests for courses would be required to be submitted via ArmyIgnitED 2.0. As part of this change, the Army stopped allowing institutions to submit invoices for a portion of 2022, which impacted our ability to collect on our accounts receivable and caused our accounts receivable to increase. Furthermore, some payments from the Army that were expected in 2021 and 2022 were delayed into 2023, which, together with recent modifications to the 90/10 Rule and enrollment growth among service members as compared to declining enrollments from students who use non-federal educational assistance funds, caused the “90%” side of the ratio to increase for 2023 at APUS. The impact of the delayed receipt of funds and APUS’s change in billing process are discussed in further detail in the Risk Factor that begins “If one or more of our institutions does not comply with the 90/10 Rule…”. There can be no assurance that our continued efforts to mitigate any adverse impact of the transition to ArmyIgnitED 2.0 on accounts receivable, bad debt, and cash flow will be successful or that ArmyIgnitED 2.0 will work as expected. Difficulties associated with the transition to ArmyIgnitED or any further upgrade or transition to a new service provider, including the related data migration, could cause further disruption to soldiers’ ability to seek and obtain TA and to the Army’s processing of invoices and payments to APUS. We could experience similar challenges with any other system transitions undertaken by other branches of the DoD or the government. For example, VA has announced multi-year plans to upgrade systems used for veteran education benefits, and we have no assurance that upgrades will not disrupt veteran access to those benefits and our ability to collect on related accounts receivable. The inability of soldiers to participate in TA programs, or of veterans to access VA education benefit programs, or continued or additional limitations on their ability to apply and participate, would have an adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition. Economic and market conditions in the U.S. and abroad and changes in interest rates could affect our enrollments, success with placement and persistence and cohort default rates. Our business has been and may in the future be adversely affected by a general economic slowdown, recession, or other adverse economic developments in the U.S. or abroad, including rising interest rates and inflation. Our institutions derive a significant portion of their revenue from Title IV programs, which include student loans with interest rates subsidized by the federal government. Additionally, some students finance their education through private loans that are not government subsidized. Historically low interest rates have created a favorable borrowing environment for students. However, our students may have to pay higher interest rates on their Title IV program loans and private loans as a result of recent interest rate increases. Any increases in applicable interest rates could result in a corresponding increase in educational costs to our existing and prospective students, which could result in a reduction in our enrollment. Higher interest rates could also contribute to higher default rates with respect to our students’ repayment of their education loans. Higher default rates may in turn adversely impact our eligibility to participate in some Title IV programs, which could adversely impact our operations and financial condition. In addition, inflation has resulted and, in the future, could result in increased costs of labor and materials, which could adversely impact our operations and financial condition. Adverse economic developments, such as those that resulted from the COVID-19 pandemic, that affect the U.S. could also result in a reduction in the number of jobs available to our graduates and lower salaries being offered in connection with available employment, which, in turn, could result in declines in our success with placements and persistence. In addition, adverse economic developments could adversely affect the ability or willingness of our former students to repay student loans, which could increase our institutions’ student loan cohort default rates and require increased time, attention, and resources to manage these defaults. Our institutions’ students are able to borrow Title IV loans in excess of their tuition and fees. The excess is received by such students as a credit balance refund. However, if a student withdraws, our institutions must return any unearned Title IV funds (which may include a portion of the credit balance refund) and must seek to collect from the student any resulting amounts owed to the institution. A protracted economic slowdown could negatively impact such students’ abilities to satisfy debts to the institution, including debts that result from returns of unearned Title IV amounts. As a result, the amount of Title IV funds we would have to return without repayment from our institutions’ students could increase, and our financial results could suffer. Our business could be harmed if our institutions experience a disruption in their ability to process Title IV financial aid. 68 We collected a substantial portion of our fiscal year 2023 consolidated revenue from receipt of Title IV financial aid program funds. Any processing disruptions by ED, by our institutions, or by third-party service providers may impact the ability of our institutions’ students to obtain Title IV financial aid on a timely basis. If our institutions experience a disruption in their ability to process Title IV financial aid, either because of administrative challenges on their part or the part of their vendors, or the inability of ED to process Title IV funds on a timely basis, it could have a material adverse effect on our institutions’ business and on our financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows. If our institutions experience a disruption in their ability to process Title IV financial aid because of administrative challenges on their part or the part of their vendors, ED could require that our institutions become subject to payment methods for Title IV programs that are not the advance payment system, which could have a material adverse effect on our institutions’ cash flows. Business combinations and acquisitions may be difficult to integrate, disrupt our business, dilute stockholder value, or divert management attention, and we may not realize the expected benefits of any consummated business combinations or acquisitions. From time to time, we explore or enter into business combinations and acquisitions, such as our recent Rasmussen Acquisition and GSUSA Acquisition, which are typically accompanied by a number of risks, including: • failure to consummate or delay in consummating the transactions; • lack of understanding of the target business; • unrealistic expectations for the benefits of the acquisitions or underestimation of the difficulties and costs of integration and impact on cash flow; • failure to achieve anticipated transaction benefits or projected financial results and operational synergies; • difficulties consolidating operations and integrating financial, information technology and other systems, as well as challenges in maintaining uniform, effective, or compliant standards, controls, policies, and procedures, including financial reporting procedures; • disruption or termination of relationships with students or business partners; • distraction of management’s and other key personnel’s attention from normal business operations during the acquisition and integration processes; • inability to obtain, or delay in obtaining, approval of the acquisition from the necessary regulatory agencies, or the imposition of operating restrictions or a letter of credit requirement on us or on the acquired institution such as in the case of the Rasmussen Acquisition; • expenses associated with the integration efforts; • increased costs of strategic transactions as a result of recent inflation and higher interest rates; • adverse tax or accounting impact; and • unidentified issues not discovered in the due diligence process, including legal and regulatory contingencies. Any inability to integrate completed acquisitions in an efficient and timely manner could have an adverse impact on our results of operations. Further, many acquisitions result in the acquirer recording goodwill. If any acquisitions for which we record goodwill are not successful or experience challenges, that goodwill may become impaired and have an adverse impact on our results of operations. For example, we recorded a non-cash charges of $146.9 million and $64.0 million, and to reflect the corresponding tax impact of $36.0 million and $15.8 million, during the fiscal years ended December 31, 2022 and 2023, respectively, to reduce the carrying value of RU goodwill and intangible assets as a result of determining that the fair value of RU was less than its carrying value. In June 2023, we completed a qualitative assessment of RU and HCN Segment goodwill to determine if an interim goodwill impairment testing was necessary. We concluded it was more likely than not the fair value of the RU Segment was less than its carrying amount resulting from RU’s underperformance when compared to 2023 internal targets, projected enrollment trends, the decline in financial performance projected for the remainder of 2023 as compared to prior projections, and our market value. As a result, we completed a quantitative impairment test related to the valuation of its RU Segment goodwill during the second quarter of 2023. Given the current competitive and regulatory environment and the uncertainties regarding the related impact on the business, there can be no assurance that the estimates and assumptions made for purposes of our goodwill impairment tests will prove to be accurate predictions of the future. The Rasmussen Acquisition was, and our acquisition of any other educational institution would also likely be, considered a change in ownership and control of the acquired institution under applicable regulatory standards. For the Rasmussen Acquisition, we needed, and for any such acquisition, we would need approval from ED, and we would need to notify or obtain approval from applicable state agencies and accrediting agencies, and possibly other regulatory bodies, to the 69 extent those agencies or bodies require such actions. A number of these approvals can only be requested after completion of an acquisition. Our inability to obtain such approvals with respect to a completed acquisition could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows. If we are not successful in completing acquisitions, we may incur substantial expenses and devote significant management time and resources without a productive result. In addition, future acquisitions could result in dilutive issuances of securities or could require use of substantial portions of our available cash, or issuances of debt or equity, as in connection with the Rasmussen Acquisition, which could adversely affect our financial condition. We have not yet been able to fully achieve the anticipated benefits of the Rasmussen Acquisition, as evidenced by the reduction in carrying value of goodwill and intangible assets discussed above and may not be able to achieve the anticipated benefits of any future acquisition, including cost savings and other synergies and growth opportunities, during the anticipated time frame, or at all. For example, events outside our control, such as changes in regulation and laws and economic trends, could adversely affect our ability to realize the expected benefits. A continued inability to realize the full extent of the anticipated benefits of the Rasmussen Acquisition or an inability to realize in full anticipated benefits of any future acquisition could have an adverse effect on our revenue, results of operations, and level of expenses, which may adversely affect the value of our common stock. Efforts to diversify our business outside of the traditional areas served by our institutions may provide strategic and operational challenges that we are not prepared or able to address. We intend to continue to explore opportunities to invest in the education industry, which could include purchasing or investing in other education-related companies or companies developing new technologies. As we seek opportunities to expand our business and serve markets beyond those traditionally served by our institutions, such as the federal government training market through the acquisition of GSUSA, we may encounter strategic and operational challenges different from those within our existing institutions. We or our institutions may have limited experience operating in new businesses and markets or new modes of teaching and may need to modify systems and strategies or enter into arrangements with other institutions and organizations. In addition, our systems and infrastructure may not be able to respond quickly enough to support new business opportunities, or we may not otherwise be able to address the strategic or operational differences of or compliance challenges associated with these new opportunities. If we are unable to successfully capitalize on new opportunities, the value of our common stock may decline over time, including because of the challenges of growing our core business under our current model. We have implemented a shared services model for services to our institutions, and challenges encountered due to the ongoing operation and expansion of this model could cause strategic or operational challenges and adversely impact us. Over the last several years, we have invested capital and human resources in the transition and implementation of a shared services model pursuant to which APEI provides services to our institutions that were previously handled directly within those institutions. However, APEI’s provision of shared services may not provide the level of service or respond quickly enough to meet the business needs of our institutions. We may n