Item 1A. Risk Factors
Item 1A. Risk Factors
There are many factors that affect our business, financial condition, operating results, cash flows and distributions, as well as the market price for our securities. The following is a description of important factors that may cause our actual results of operations in future periods to differ materially from those currently expected or discussed in forward-looking statements set forth in this Annual Report. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we may currently deem immaterial also may impair our business operations. Forward-looking statements and such risks, uncertainties and other factors speak only as of the date of this Annual Report, and we expressly disclaim any obligation or undertaking to update or revise any forward-looking statement contained herein, to reflect any change in our expectations with regard thereto, or any other change in events, conditions or circumstances on which any such statement is based, except to the extent otherwise required by law. See “Forward-Looking Statements.” These risk factors should be read in conjunction with other information set forth in this Annual Report, including Item 7, Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, and Item 8, Consolidated Financial Statements and Supplementary Data, including the related Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
Upon the consummation of the Transaction with GCU on July 1, 2018 (as discussed in “ Part I. Business – The Transaction ”), we became a third-party provider of education services to GCU, our only university partner during 2018. In January 2019, we began providing education services to numerous university partners across the United States, through our wholly-owned subsidiary, Orbis Education, which we acquired on January 22, 2019. In the healthcare field, GCE, together with Orbis Education, works in partnership with a growing number of top universities and healthcare networks across the country, offering health care related academic programs at off-campus classroom and laboratory sites located near healthcare providers and developing high-quality, career-ready graduates who enter the workforce ready to meet the demands of the healthcare industry . While we currently provide services to 25 university partners across the United States, GCU is, and will for the foreseeable future remain, our most significant university partner. Accordingly, the risk factors set forth below include risks attributable to GCU’s operations, which could materially affect us.
Risks Related to Our Relationship with GCU
A large percentage of our revenue is attributable to our contractual relationship as a service provider to GCU, and the loss of, or a decline in enrollment in, GCU programs could significantly reduce our revenue and impact our overall financial performance.
We expect the revenue derived from our Master Services Agreement with GCU to account for a large percentage of our revenue for the foreseeable future. Any decline in reputation or changes in policies of GCU could adversely affect its student enrollment and its overall financial and operating results, which could materially impact us. Furthermore, GCU has the right to terminate the Master Services Agreement early after the later of seven (7) years or the payment in full of the Secured Note (defined below) and, upon the termination or expiration of the Master Services Agreement, GCU is not required to continue using us as the provider of the services set forth thereunder. If GCU were to terminate or not renew its relationship with us, or if certain of the programs offered by GCU pursuant to the Master Services Agreement were to materially underperform for any reason, it could negatively affect our reputation, revenue and future operating results.
GCU’s board of trustees and management have fiduciary and other duties that require them to focus on the best interests of GCU and, over time, those interests could diverge from those of GCE.
GCU is a separate Arizona non-profit corporation under the control of an independent board of trustees, none of whose members have ever served in a management or corporate board role at GCE. Accordingly, GCE’s relationship with GCU, both pursuant to the Master Services Agreement and operationally, is no longer as owner and operator, but as a third-party service provider to an independent customer. While GCE believes that its relationship with GCU will remain strong, GCU’s board of trustees and management have fiduciary and other duties that require them to focus on the best interests of GCU and, over time, those interests could diverge from those of GCE.
26
Table of Contents
Our Chief Executive Officer’s role as President of GCU may adversely affect his ability to run GCE .
Mr. Brian E. Mueller has served as the Chief Executive Officer of GCE since 2008, the Chairman of the Board of GCE since 2017 and the President of GCU since 2012. In connection with the Transaction, the Board of Directors of GCE and the board of trustees of GCU each determined that Mr. Mueller should retain those roles. Accordingly, Mr. Mueller serves as the Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of GCE and as the President of GCU, although he is prohibited from serving on the board of trustees of GCU. Our Board and the board of trustees of GCU each recognized that Mr. Mueller’s dual role could raise conflict of interest issues. Accordingly, at the time of the Transaction, GCU adopted governance provisions that prohibit Mr. Mueller from serving on the board of trustees of GCU. We also jointly imposed a structure, through GCU’s governance documents and through express provisions of the Master Services Agreement, that prevent Mr. Mueller from participating in day-to-day management of, or negotiations between GCE and GCU relating to, the Master Services Agreement . In addition , Mr. Mueller’s dual capacity may at times adversely affect his ability to devote time, attention, and effort to GCE.
The purchase price for the Transferred Assets in the Transaction was paid in the form of a senior Secured Note, and our ability to realize the negotiated value of the acquired assets is subject to GCU’s performance and its ability to pay amounts due under the Secured Note as they come due.
GCU paid the purchase price for the Transferred Assets by issuing to GCE a secured note (the “Secured Note”) that is governed by a credit agreement between GCE and GCU. That credit agreement contains customary commercial credit terms, including affirmative and negative covenants applicable to GCU, and provides that the Secured Note bears interest at an annual rate of 6.0%, has a maturity date of June 30, 2025, and is secured by all of the assets of GCU. The Secured Note provides for GCU to make interest only payments during the term, with all principal and accrued and unpaid interest due at maturity and also provides that GCE will lend additional amounts to GCU to fund GCU-approved capital expenditures during the first three years of the term. Our ability to realize the negotiated value of the acquired assets depends on GCU’s performance and its ability to pay amounts due under the Secured Note as they come due.
Other Risks Related to Our Business
The recent global coronavirus outbreak could harm our business, results of operations, and financial condition, and has harmed our most significant university partner .
In March 2020, the World Health Organization declared COVID-19 a global pandemic. This contagious outbreak, which has continued to spread, and the related adverse public health developments, including orders to shelter-in-place, travel restrictions and mandated non-essential business closures, have adversely affected workforces, organizations, customers, economies and financial markets globally, leading to an economic downturn and increased market volatility. It has also disrupted the normal operations of many businesses, including ours, and those of our university partners.
This outbreak, as well as measures taken to contain the spread of COVID-19, has impacted GCU’s students and its business in a number of ways, including the closure of dormitories and GCU’s hotel and various ancillary businesses near the end of the Spring 2020 semester , limitations on the number of residential students, doctoral residencies and the various ancillary businesses in the summer and fall months , and a delay in the start of its Fall 2020 ground traditional student semester including when residential students could move on to campus. A significant number of traditional ground students chose to take the Fall semester in an online modality rather than living on campus. These actions served to reduce GCU’s non-tuition revenue and, consequently, the service revenue we earned under the Master Services Agreement.
The COVID-19 outbreak also impacted some of our other university partners’ students and their businesses as well, including, but not limited to decreasing the student enrollments at some of our other university partners as some prelicensure nursing and occupational therapy students delayed their education including those that had to relocate to attend class.
The COVID-19 outbreak could cause future disruptions to our university partners, including, but not limited to:
27
Table of Contents
● d ecreasing the student enrollments at our university partners as students might delay their education including those that relocate to attend class;
● decreasing the number of residential students at GCU;
● i mpacting current and prospective university partners’ desire to launch new locations with us;
● n egatively impacting collections of accounts receivable from university partners;
● n egatively impacting our ability to facilitate placements for students in clinical graduate programs which could delay their path to graduation; and
● h arming our business, results of operations and financial condition.
The outbreak also presents challenges as approximately 90% of our entire workforce is currently, and is expected to continue for the foreseeable future, working remotely and this could cause increased risks in the areas of internal control, cyber security and the use of remote technology, which could result in interruptions or disruptions in normal operational processes. We have eliminated all non-essential travel as a result of the pandemic and as a result are seeing a decrease in travel costs.
The COVID-19 pandemic presents material uncertainty and risk with respect to our financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and performance and it is not possible for us to completely predict the duration or magnitude of the adverse results of the outbreak and its effects on us. The COVID-19 pandemic may also have the effect of heightening many of the risk factors identified in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, such as those related to disruption or failures of our learning platform.
If we are determined to have paid improper incentive compensation to our covered employees, or tuition sharing arrangements are deemed to violate the incentive compensation regulations, our business will be impaired.
An institution that participates in the Title IV programs may not provide any commission, bonus, or other incentive payment based directly or indirectly on success in securing enrollments or financial aid to any person or entity engaged in any student recruitment, admissions, or financial aid awarding activity. Current regulations provide that higher education institutions agree that it will not "provide any commission, bonus, or other incentive payment based in any part, directly or indirectly, upon success in securing enrollments or the award of financial aid, to any person or entity who is engaged in any student recruitment or admission activity, or in making decisions regarding the award of title IV, HEA program funds." Pursuant to this regulation, we are prohibited from offering our covered employees, which are those involved with or responsible for recruiting or admissions activities, any bonus or incentive-based compensation based on the successful recruitment, admission or enrollment of students into a postsecondary institution. We are also precluded from offering our covered employees that work on financial aid matters (if any), any bonus or incentive-based compensation based on the award of financial aid to students enrolled in a postsecondary institution.
In addition, the regulation raises a question as to whether companies like ours, as an entity, are prohibited from entering into tuition revenue-sharing arrangements with university partners. On March 17, 2011, ED issued official agency guidance, known as a "Dear Colleague Letter," or the DCL, providing guidance on this point. The DCL states that "[t]he Department generally views payment based on the amount of tuition generated as an indirect payment of incentive compensation based on success in recruitment and therefore a prohibited basis upon which to measure the value of the services provided" and that "[t]his is true regardless of the manner in which the entity compensates its employees." But the DCL also provides an important exception to the ban on tuition revenue-sharing arrangements between institutions and third parties. According to the DCL, ED does not consider payment based on the amount of tuition generated by an institution to violate the incentive compensation ban if the payment compensates an "unaffiliated third party" that provides a set of "bundled services" that includes recruitment services, such as those we provide. Example 2-B in the DCL is described as a "possible business model" developed "with the statutory mandate in mind." Example 2-B describes the following as a possible business model:
"A third party that is not affiliated with the institution it serves and is not affiliated with any other institution that provides educational services, provides bundled services to the institution including marketing, enrollment application assistance, recruitment services, course support for online delivery of courses, the provision of technology, placement services for internships, and student career counseling. The institution may pay the entity an amount based on tuition generated for the institution by the entity’s activities for all the bundled
28
Table of Contents
services that are offered and provided collectively, as long as the entity does not make prohibited compensation payments to its employees, and the institution does not pay the entity separately for student recruitment services provided by the entity."
The DCL guidance indicates that an arrangement that complies with Example 2-B will be deemed to be in compliance with the incentive compensation provisions of the HEA and ED’s regulations. Our business model and contractual arrangements with our university partners closely follow Example 2-B in the DCL. In addition, we assure that none of our "covered employees" is paid any bonus or other incentive compensation in violation of the rule.
Because the bundled services rule was promulgated in the form of agency guidance issued by ED in the form of a DCL and is not codified by statute or regulation, the rule could be altered or removed without prior notice, public comment period or other administrative procedural requirements that accompany formal agency rulemaking. Similarly, a court could invalidate the rule in an action involving our company or our university partners, or in action that does not involve us at all. The revision, removal or invalidation of the bundled services rule by Congress, ED or a court could require us to change our business model.
We may have difficulty integrating future acquisitions, which would reduce the anticipated benefits of those transactions and the Acquisition.
In addition to the Acquisition in January 2019, we intend to continually evaluate potential acquisitions of complementary businesses, products, services and technologies, including those that are significant in size and scope. The risks we may encounter in acquisitions include:
● i f we incur significant debt to finance a future acquisition and our business does not perform as expected, we may have difficulty complying with debt covenants;
● w e may be unable to make a future acquisition which is in our best interest due to our existing indebtedness;
● i f we use our stock to make a future acquisition, it will dilute existing stockholders;
● w e may have difficulty assimilating the operations and personnel of any acquired company;
● t he challenge and additional investment involved with integrating new products, services and technologies into our sales and marketing process;
● o ur ongoing business may be disrupted by transition and integration issues;
● t he costs and complexity of integrating the internal information technology infrastructure of each acquired business with ours may be greater than expected and may require additional capital investments;
● w e may be unable to achieve the financial and strategic goals for any acquired businesses;
● w e may have difficulty in maintaining controls, procedures and policies during the transition and integration period following a future acquisition;
● o ur relationships with existing clients could be adversely affected; and
● a s successor we may be subject to certain liabilities of our acquisition targets.
Our failure to effectively integrate any future acquisition would adversely affect the benefit of such transaction, including potential synergies or sales growth opportunities, in the time frame anticipated.
Our success depends, in part, on the effectiveness of our marketing and advertising programs in recruiting new students.
Building awareness of our university partner institutions, and the programs they offer, is critical to our ability to attract prospective students. It is also critical to our success that we convert prospective students to enrolled students in a cost-effective manner and that these enrolled students remain active in the programs of our client institutions. Some of
29
Table of Contents
the factors that could prevent us from successfully recruiting, enrolling, and retaining students in those programs include:
● w ith respect to GCU, ED’s determination to treat GCU as a proprietary institution for Title IV purposes, which could impact our ability to recruit students to GCU;
● t he reduced availability of, or higher interest rates and other costs associated with, Title IV loan funds or other sources of financial aid;
● t he emergence of more successful competitors;
● f actors related to our marketing, including the costs and effectiveness of Internet advertising and broad-based branding campaigns and recruiting efforts;
● p erformance problems with our online systems;
● f ailure of our client institutions to maintain institutional and specialized accreditations;
● t he requirements of the education agencies that regulate our client institutions which could restrict their initiation of new programs and modification of existing programs;
● t he requirements of the education agencies that regulate our university partner institutions which restrict the ways schools can compensate their recruitment personnel;
● i ncreased regulation of online education, including in states in which our university partner institutions do not have a physical presence;
● r estrictions that may be imposed on graduates of online programs that seek certification or licensure in certain states;
● s tudent dissatisfaction with our services and programs;
● d amage to our reputation or other adverse effects as a result of negative publicity in the media, in industry or governmental reports, or otherwise, affecting us or other companies in the post-secondary education sector;
● p rice reductions by competitors that we are unwilling or unable to match;
● a decline in the acceptance of online education;
● a n adverse economic or other development that affects job prospects in our core disciplines; and
● a decrease in the perceived or actual economic benefits that students derive from the programs offered by any university partner institution.
If we are unable to continue to develop awareness of the programs of our university partners, and to recruit, enroll, and retain students, enrollments would suffer and our ability to increase revenues and maintain profitability would be significantly impaired.
Our failure to keep pace with changing market needs and technology could harm our ability to meet the needs of our client institutions.
We have invested significant resources to develop and implement features that enhance the online classroom experience, such as delivering course content through streaming video, simulations, and other interactive enhancements as well as technology to meet the back-office support needs of our client institutions’ students. Our information technology systems and tools could become impaired or obsolete due to our action or failure to act. For instance, we could install new information technology without accurately assessing its costs or benefits, or we could experience delayed or ineffective implementation of new information technology. We could fail to respond in a timely manner for future technological developments in our industry. Should our actions or failure to act impair or render our information technology less effective, this could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
A decline in the overall growth of enrollment in post-secondary institutions, or in the number of students seeking degrees online, could cause our university partner institutions to experience lower enrollment, which could negatively impact our future growth.
Based on industry analyses, we believe that enrollment growth in degree-granting, post-secondary institutions is slowing and that the number of high school graduates that are eligible to enroll in degree-granting, post-secondary institutions is expected to decrease over the next few years. In order to maintain current growth rates, we will need to
30
Table of Contents
attract a larger percentage of students in existing markets to our client institutions and work with university partner institutions to create new academic programs. In addition, if job growth in the fields related to our university partners’ core disciplines is weaker than expected, as a result of any regional or national economic downturn or otherwise, fewer students may seek the types of degrees that our clients offer. Our failure to attract new students for our university partners, or the decisions by prospective students to seek degrees in other disciplines, would have an adverse impact on our future growth.
We face competition from established and other emerging companies, which could divert university partners to our competitors, result in pricing pressure and significantly reduce our revenue.
We expect existing competitors and new entrants to the educational services market to revise and improve their business models constantly in response to challenges from competing businesses, including ours.
Our primary competitors include EmbanetCompass (owned by Pearson), Wiley Education Services, and 2U. There are also several new and existing vendors providing some or all of the services we provide to other segments of the education market, and these vendors may pursue the institutions we target. In addition, colleges and universities may choose to continue using or to develop their own solutions in-house, rather than pay for our solutions.
Increased competition may result in changes in the revenue share percentage we are able to negotiate to receive from a university partner. The competitive landscape may also result in longer and more complex sales cycles with a prospective university partner, which would negatively affect our ability to add additional university partners and thus our ability to grow our business.
A number of competitive factors could cause us to lose potential university partner opportunities or force us to offer our solutions on less favorable economic terms, including
● c ompetitors may develop service offerings that our potential university partners find to be more compelling than ours;
● c ompetitors may adopt more aggressive pricing policies and offer more attractive sales terms, adapt more quickly to new technologies and changes in university partner and student requirements, and devote greater resources to the acquisition of qualified students than we can; and
● c urrent and potential competitors may establish cooperative relationships among themselves or with third parties to enhance their products and expand their markets, and our industry is likely to see an increasing number of new entrants and increased consolidation. Accordingly, new competitors or alliances among competitors may emerge and rapidly acquire significant market share.
We may not be able to compete successfully against current and future competitors. In addition, competition may intensify as our competitors raise additional capital and as established companies in other market segments or geographic markets expand into our market segments or geographic markets. If we cannot compete successfully against our competitors, our ability to grow our business could be impaired.
We are subject to laws and regulations as a result of our collection and use of personal information, and any violations of such laws or regulations, or any breach, theft, or loss of such information, could adversely affect our reputation and operations.
Possession and use of personal information in our operations subjects us to risks and costs that could harm our business. We collect, use, and retain large amounts of personal information regarding our primary university partner’s applicants and students, including social security numbers, tax return information, personal and family financial data, and credit card numbers. We also collect and maintain personal information of our employees in the ordinary course of our business. Our services can be accessed globally through the Internet. Therefore, we may be subject to the application of national privacy laws in countries outside the U.S. from which applicants and students access our services. Such privacy laws could impose conditions that limit the way we market and provide our services.
Our computer networks and the networks of certain of our vendors that hold and manage confidential information on our behalf may be vulnerable to unauthorized access, employee theft or misuse, computer hackers, computer viruses,
31
Table of Contents
and other security threats. Confidential information may also inadvertently become available to third parties when we integrate systems or migrate data to our servers in connection with periodic hardware or software upgrades.
Due to the sensitive nature of the personal information stored on our servers, our networks may be targeted by hackers seeking to access this data. A user who circumvents security measures could misappropriate sensitive information or cause interruptions or malfunctions in our operations. Although we use security and business controls to limit access and use of personal information, a third party may be able to circumvent those security and business controls, which could result in a breach of student or employee privacy. In addition, errors in the storage, use, or transmission of personal information could result in a breach of privacy for current or prospective students or employees. Possession and use of personal information in our operations also subjects us to legislative and regulatory burdens that could require us to implement certain policies and procedures, such as the procedures we adopted to comply with the Red Flags Rule that was promulgated by the FTC under the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act and that requires the establishment of guidelines and policies regarding identity theft related to student credit accounts, and could require us to make certain notifications of data breaches and restrict our use of personal information. Similarly, California passed the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) in 2018 (which went into effect in 2020), and Massachusetts recently proposed MA Bill SD 341, “An Act relative to consumer data privacy.” There are similar bills pending in a number of other states, as well. CCPA and MA Bill SD 341 each represent a trend toward stronger privacy protections and greater data transparency in the U.S. Currently, federal law legislates privacy on an industry by industry basis. Without an overarching federal law driving privacy compliance, the risk is high of a patchwork of privacy legislation formed by individual state laws, similar to the states’ approach to breach notification obligations. This could not only increase costs for compliance but also raise the risk of enforcement by individual state Attorneys General. A violation of any laws or regulations relating to the collection or use of personal information could result in the imposition of fines against us. As a result, we may be required to expend significant resources to protect against the threat of these security breaches or to alleviate problems caused by these breaches. A major breach, theft, or loss of personal information regarding our university partner’s students and their families or our employees that is held by us or our vendors, or a violation of laws or regulations relating to the same, could have a material adverse effect on our reputation and result in further regulation and oversight by federal and state authorities and increased costs of compliance.
We are required to comply with The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, or FERPA, and failure to do so could harm our reputation and negatively affect our business.
FERPA generally prohibits an institution of higher education participating in Title IV programs from disclosing personally identifiable information from a student’s education records without the student’s consent. Our university partners and their students disclose to us certain information that originates from or comprises a student education record under FERPA. As an entity that provides services to institutions participating in Title IV programs, we are indirectly subject to FERPA, and we may not transfer or otherwise disclose any personally identifiable information from a student record to another party other than in a manner permitted under the statute. If we violate FERPA, it could result in a material breach of contract with one or more of our university partners and could harm our reputation. Further, in the event that we disclose student information in violation of FERPA, the DOE could require a university partner to suspend our access to their student information for at least five years.
Capacity constraints, system disruptions, or security breaches in our online computer networks and phone systems could have a material adverse effect on our ability to attract and retain students.
The performance and reliability of the infrastructure of our computer networks and phone systems, including the online programs of our university partners, is critical to our operations, reputation and to our ability to attract and retain students on our university partners’ behalf. Any computer system disruption or failure, or a sudden and significant increase in traffic on the servers that host our online operations, may result in the online courses and programs being unavailable for a period of time. In addition, any significant failure of our computer networks or servers, whether as a result of third-party actions or in connection with planned upgrades and conversions, could disrupt our operations. Individual, sustained, or repeated occurrences could significantly damage the reputation of our technology/services and result in a loss of potential or existing students of our university partner institutions. Additionally, our operations are vulnerable to interruption or malfunction due to events beyond our control, including natural disasters and network and telecommunications failures. Our computer networks may also be vulnerable to unauthorized access, computer hackers, computer viruses, malicious code, organized cyber-attacks and other security problems. A user who circumvents security
32
Table of Contents
measures could misappropriate proprietary information or cause interruptions to or malfunctions in operations. As a result, we may be required to expend significant resources to protect against the threat of these security breaches or to alleviate problems caused by these incidents. Any interruption to our operations could have a material adverse effect on our ability to attract students to our university partner’s programs and to retain those students.
Risks Related to the Extensive Regulation of The Higher Education Industry
Our failure, or our university partners’ failure, to comply with the extensive regulatory requirements governing institutions of higher education could result in financial penalties, restrictions on our operations or growth, or loss of external financial aid funding for our university partners’ students.
To participate in the Title IV programs, a school must be authorized by the appropriate state post-secondary agency or agencies, be accredited by an accrediting commission recognized by ED, and be certified as an eligible institution by ED. In addition, the operations and programs of our primary university partner, and any future university partners, are regulated by other state education agencies and additional accrediting commissions. As a result of these requirements, we are subject to extensive regulation from state entities, institutional accrediting commissions, specialized accrediting commissions, and ED. These regulatory requirements cover many of our operations, as well as the operations of our university partners. These include regulations related to educational programs, instructional and administrative staff, administrative procedures, marketing, recruiting, financial operations, and financial condition of any university partner. These regulatory requirements also affect our ability to assist university partner institutions with adding new educational programs and changing existing educational programs. The agencies that regulate higher education periodically revise their requirements and modify their interpretations of existing requirements. Regulatory requirements are not always precise and clear, and regulatory agencies may sometimes disagree with the way we have (or any university partner has) interpreted or applied these requirements. Any misinterpretation of regulatory requirements could materially adversely affect us. If we fail, or any university partner institution fails, to comply with any of these regulatory requirements, we or any university partner could suffer financial penalties, limitations on our operations, or other sanctions, each of which could materially adversely affect us. In addition, if we or any university partner are charged with regulatory violations, our reputation could be damaged, which could have a negative impact on our stock price and enrollments at university partner institutions. ED and other regulators have increased the frequency and severity of their enforcement actions against post-secondary schools. In some cases, these enforcement actions have resulted in material sanctions, loss of Title IV eligibility, or closure in schools. We cannot predict with certainty how all of these regulatory requirements will be applied, or whether we will be able to comply with all of the applicable requirements in the future.
Rulemaking by the ED could materially and adversely affect our business.
Over the past few years, the ED has regularly promulgated new regulations and guidance that impact our university partners and our business directly. These and other regulations and guidance documents, including those discussed above under “Business – Regulation,” can increase our operating costs and, in some cases, change the manner in which we operate our business. In addition, because certain of these regulations have been vacated or blocked as a result of litigation challenging the regulations, there remains substantial uncertainty regarding their present or future effectiveness or enforcement. New or amended regulations in the future, particularly regulations focused on third-party servicers, could further negatively impact our business.
If ED does not recertify a university partner institution to continue participating in the Title IV programs, the students we assist would lose their access to Title IV program funds, or a university partner institution could be recertified but required to accept significant limitations as a condition of its continued participation in the Title IV programs.
ED certification to participate in the Title IV programs lasts a maximum of six years, and institutions are thus required to seek recertification from ED on a regular basis in order to continue their participation in the Title IV programs. An institution must also apply for recertification by ED if it undergoes a change in control, as defined by ED regulations, and may be subject to similar review if it expands its operations or educational programs in certain ways.
33
Table of Contents
As an example, on November 6, 2019, ED informed GCU that it had approved the Transaction and granted to GCU a provisional Program Participation Agreement (“PPA”), permitting GCU to participate in Title IV, HEA programs on a provisional basis for the period through September 30, 2022. This PPA, which was automatically granted on a provisional basis due to the fact that the Transaction constituted a change of control of GCU, was granted without any requirement to post a letter of credit or any growth restrictions. Accordingly, GCU is authorized to participate in Title IV, HEA programs for the stated period. GCU will need to reapply for certification on or before June 30, 2022 to continue its participation in the Title IV HEA programs and, at that time, a determination will be made whether GCU meets the requirements for full certification.
There can be no assurance that ED will recertify any university partner institution at that time or that it will not impose conditions or other restrictions on any university partner institution as a condition of approving any future recertification. If ED does not renew or withdraws certification to participate in the Title IV programs from any university partners, students at that institution would no longer be able to receive Title IV program funds. Alternatively, ED could renew a university partner institution’s certification, but restrict or delay students’ receipt of Title IV funds, limit the number of students to whom it can disburse such funds, place other restrictions on the institution, or it could delay recertification after any university partners’ program participation agreement expires, in which case our university partner’s certification would continue on a month-to-month basis. Any of these outcomes could have a material adverse effect on our university partners’ enrollments and us.
A university partner institution could lose the ability to participate in the Title IV programs if it fails to maintain its institutional accreditation, and our university partners’ student enrollments could decline if a client institution fails to maintain any of its accreditations or approvals.
An institution must be accredited by an accrediting commission recognized by ED in order to participate in the Title IV programs. Our primary university partner, GCU has been regionally accredited by the HLC and its predecessor since 1968, most recently obtaining reaccreditation in 2017 for the ten-year period through 2027, and the HLC approved the Transaction in February 2018. Some of our other partners are accredited by HLC while the others are accredited by different accrediting bodies that are likely to have standards that are different from those of the HLC. Accrediting bodies review the accredited status of institutions periodically (for example, the HLC reviews institutions every ten years, along with a mid-term report in year four).
If any client institution fails to satisfy the relevant accrediting standards, it could lose accreditation, which would cause a revocation of its eligibility to participate in the Title IV programs. This could cause a significant decline in student enrollments, and could have a material adverse effect on us. In addition, many university partner institutions will have educational programs that are also accredited by specialized accrediting commissions or approved by specialized state agencies. If our university partner institutions fail to satisfy the standards of any of those specialized accrediting commissions or state agencies, the institution could lose the specialized accreditation or approval for the affected programs, which could result in materially reduced student enrollments in those programs and have a material adverse effect on us.
A university partner institution may lose eligibility to participate in the Title IV programs if its student loan default rates are too high.
An institution may lose its eligibility to participate in some or all of the Title IV programs if, for three consecutive years, 30% or more of its students who were required to begin repayment on their student loans in one year default on their payment by the end of the second year. In addition, an institution may lose its eligibility to participate in some or all of the Title IV programs if the default rate of its students exceeds 40% for any single year. While GCU’s cohort default rates, for example, have historically been significantly below these levels, we cannot assure you that this will continue to be the case. Increases in interest rates or declines in income or job losses for students could contribute to higher default rates on student loans. In addition, while we will conduct appropriate diligence on new university partner institutions, we cannot guarantee that all university partner institutions will have a cohort default rate as low as GCU. Having a university partner exceed the student loan default rate thresholds and losing eligibility to participate in the Title IV programs would have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, financial condition, and results of
34
Table of Contents
operations. Any future changes in the formula for calculating student loan default rates, economic conditions, or other factors that cause default rates to increase, could materially adversely affect us.
If our university partner institutions do not meet specific financial responsibility standards established by ED, they may be required to post a letter of credit or accept other limitations in order to continue participating in the Title IV programs, or could lose eligibility to participate in the Title IV programs.
To participate in the Title IV programs, an institution must either satisfy specific quantitative standards of financial responsibility prescribed by ED or post a letter of credit in favor of ED and possibly accept operating restrictions as well. These financial responsibility tests are applied to each institution on an annual basis based on the institution’s audited consolidated financial statements, and may be applied at other times, such as if the institution undergoes a change in control. These tests may also be applied to an institution’s parent company or other related entity. The operating restrictions that may be placed on an institution that does not meet the quantitative standards of financial responsibility include being transferred from the advance payment method of receiving Title IV program funds to either the reimbursement or the heightened cash monitoring system, which could result in a significant delay in the institution’s receipt of those funds. As a service provider, we are not directly subject to this regulation. However, if ED were to determine that a university partner institution did not meet the financial responsibility standards due to a failure to meet the composite score or other financial responsibility factors, ED could impose a range of sanctions on the institution, such as requiring the institution to post a letter of credit, accept provisional certification (which would hamper the ability of the institution to add new programs), comply with additional ED monitoring requirements, agree to receive Title IV program funds under an arrangement other than ED’s standard advance funding arrangement, such as the reimbursement system of payment or heightened cash monitoring, and to comply with or accept other limitations on the ability to increase the number of programs offered by our client institutions or the number of students they enroll, any of which sanctions could have an adverse impact on our business. For example , GCU, calculated its composite score with respect to its fiscal years ending June 30, 2020 and 2019. As of June 30, 2020 and 2019, GCU’s composite score was 1.5 and 2.2, respectively, using the proprietary school calculation. If GCU’s future composite scores do not exceed 1.5 or if ED would impose any sanctions on GCU if its composite score is below 1.5. If any such sanctions were imposed on GCU or one of our other partners, it could have a negative impact on our ability to conduct our business.
If our university partner institutions do not comply with ED’s administrative capability standards, we could suffer harm.
To continue participating in the Title IV programs, an institution must demonstrate to ED that the institution is capable of adequately administering the Title IV programs under specific standards prescribed by ED. These administrative capability criteria require, among other things, the institution to have an adequate number of qualified personnel to administer the Title IV programs, have adequate procedures for disbursing and safeguarding Title IV funds and for maintaining records, submit all required reports and consolidated financial statements in a timely manner, and not have significant problems that affect the institution’s ability to administer the Title IV programs. As a service provider, we assist our university partners with some facets of these areas. As such, we must be mindful of, and compliant with, the administrative capability requirements. If our university partner institutions fail to satisfy any of these criteria, ED may assess financial penalties against such institutions, restrict the manner in which those institutions receive Title IV funds, require them to post a letter of credit, place them on provisional certification status, or limit or terminate participation in the Title IV programs, any of which could materially adversely affect us. As a third-party servicer, if we are the cause of the administrative deficiency, we may also face monetary sanctions and actions to limit, suspend, or terminate our ability to offer those and other services to institutions of higher education.
A finding that our university partner institutions violated ED’s substantial misrepresentation regulation could materially and adversely affect our business.
The HEA prohibits an institution that participates in Title IV programs from engaging in “substantial misrepresentation” of the nature of its educational program, its financial charges, or the employability of its graduates. Under these rules, a misrepresentation is any statement made by the institution or a third party that provides educational programs, marketing, advertising, recruiting, or admissions services to the institution that is false, erroneous or has the likelihood or tendency to deceive or confuse. A substantial misrepresentation is any misrepresentation on which the
35
Table of Contents
person to whom it was made could reasonably be expected to rely, or has reasonably relied, to that person’s detriment. The regulation also covers statements made by any representative of an institution, including agents, employees and subcontractors, and statements made directly or indirectly to any third party, including state agencies, government officials or the public, and not just to students or prospective students. Considering the breadth of the definition of “substantial misrepresentation,” it is possible that despite our efforts to prevent such misrepresentations, our employees or contractors may make statements that could be construed as substantial misrepresentations for which our current and any future university partners would be held responsible by ED. We and our employees and subcontractors, as agents of our university partners, must use a high degree of care to comply with such rules and are prohibited by contract from making any false, erroneous or misleading statements about our university partners. To avoid an issue under the misrepresentation rule and similar rules, we assure that all marketing materials are approved in advance by our university partners before they are used by our employees and we carefully monitor our employees and subcontractors conversations with students and prospective students.
Despite our best efforts, we may face complaints from our university partners’ students and prospective students over statements made by us and our agents throughout the conduct of all our services which would expose our university partners, and derivatively us, to increased risk of enforcement action and applicable sanctions or other penalties and increased risk of private qui tam actions under the Federal False Claims Act. Also, if ED determines that an institution (including its contractors) has engaged in substantial misrepresentation, ED may revoke an institution’s program participation agreement, impose limitations on the institution’s participation in Title IV programs, deny applications from the institution for approval of new programs or locations or other matters, or initiate proceedings to fine the institution or limit, suspend, or terminate its eligibility to participate in Title IV programs. Similar rules apply under state laws or are incorporated in institutional accreditation standards and the FTC applies similar rules prohibiting any unfair or deceptive marketing practices to the education sector. If ED or other regulator determines that statements made by us or on our university partner’s behalf are in violation of the regulations, we could be subject to sanctions and other liability, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.
To the extent we are performing return to Title IV calculations for our university partner institutions, we are subject to sanctions if we fail to correctly calculate and timely return Title IV program funds for students who withdraw before completing their educational program.
A school participating in the Title IV programs must calculate the amount of unearned Title IV program funds that it has disbursed to students who withdraw from their educational programs before completing such programs and must return those unearned funds to the appropriate lender or ED in a timely manner, generally within 45 days of the date the school determines that the student has withdrawn. To the extent our services for a university partner include conducting returns to Title IV, as they do with our primary university partner, GCU, we would likely be jointly and severally liable to ED, along with the relevant client, for return of those funds. Further, we could be fined or otherwise sanctioned by ED, which could increase our cost of regulatory compliance and materially adversely affect us. Further, a failure to comply with these regulatory requirements could result in termination of our ability to continue providing these services to other university partner institutions, which would materially affect us.
A reduction in funding or new restrictions on eligibility for the Federal Pell Grant Program, or the elimination of subsidized Stafford loans, could make college less affordable for certain students at our university partner institutions, which could negatively impact our university partner institutions’ enrollments, revenue and results of operations.
The U.S. Congress must periodically reauthorize the HEA and annually determine the funding level for each Title IV program. In 2008, the HEA was reauthorized through September 30, 2013 by the Higher Education Opportunity Act. Changes to the HEA, including changes in eligibility and funding for Title IV programs, are likely to occur in subsequent reauthorizations, but we cannot predict the scope or substance of any such changes.
Any action by Congress that significantly reduces Title IV program funding, whether through across-the-board funding reductions, sequestration or otherwise, or materially impacts the eligibility of our client institutions or students to participate in Title IV programs would have a material adverse effect on our client institutions enrollment, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. Congressional action could also require us to modify our practices in
36
Table of Contents
ways that could increase our administrative costs and reduce our operating income, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
We cannot offer new programs for our university partners or expand university partner operations into certain states if such actions are not timely approved by the applicable regulatory agencies, and our university partners may have to repay Title IV funds disbursed to students enrolled in any such programs, schools, or states if they do not obtain prior approval.
Our expansion efforts include developing new educational programs for our university partners. If our university partner institutions are unable to obtain the necessary approvals for such new programs or operations, or if our university partner institutions are unable to obtain such approvals in a timely manner, our ability to consummate the planned actions and the ability of our university partner institutions to provide Title IV funds to any affected students would be impaired, which could have a material adverse effect on our expansion plans. For example, GCU, because it is currently certified to participate in the Title IV programs through September 30, 2022 on a provisional basis, is required to obtain ED approval for new programs, which requirement could impede GCU’s ability to introduce new programs and slow its growth.
If our university partner institutions do not maintain state authorization, they may not operate or participate in the Title IV programs.
A school that grants degrees or certificates must be authorized by the relevant education agency of the state in which it is located. State authorization is also required for their students to be eligible to receive funding under the Title IV programs. To maintain their state authorization, our university partner institutions must continuously meet standards relating to, among other things, educational programs, facilities, instructional and administrative staff, marketing and recruitment, financial operations, addition of new locations and educational programs, and various operational and administrative procedures. If our client institutions fail to satisfy any of these standards, they could lose state authorization to offer educational programs, which would also cause them to lose eligibility to participate in the Title IV programs and have a material adverse effect on us.
In addition, almost every state imposes regulatory requirements on educational institutions that have physical facilities located within the state’s boundaries. Individual state laws establish standards in areas such as educational programs, facilities, instructional and administrative staff, marketing and recruitment, financial operations, addition of new locations and educational programs, and various operational and administrative procedures, some of which are different than the standards prescribed by other regulators. Several states have sought to assert jurisdiction over educational institutions offering online degree programs that have no physical location in the state but that have some activity in the state, such as enrolling or offering educational services to students who reside in the state, employing faculty who reside in the state, or advertising to or recruiting prospective students in the state.
State regulatory requirements for online education have historically varied among the states. To address this issue and to meet new ED requirements many schools have applied and have been approved to be an approved institutional participant in the State Authorization Reciprocity Agreement (“SARA”). SARA is an agreement among member states, districts and territories that establishes comparable national standards for interstate offering of post-secondary distance education courses and programs. It is intended to make it easier for students to take online courses offered by post-secondary institutions based in another state. SARA is overseen by a national council (NC-SARA) and administered by four regional education compacts. GCU, for example, has been granted membership in SARA in Arizona (AZ-SARA), which is administered by the Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education (referred to as W-SARA). There is a yearly renewal for participating in NC-SARA and AZ-SARA and institutions must agree to meet certain requirements to participate. As of June 30, 2018, all states other than California are members of SARA.
Any state that does not participate in SARA may impose regulatory requirements on out-of-state post-secondary institutions operating within their boundaries, such as those having a physical facility or conducting certain academic activities within the state. GCU, for example, enrolls students in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. Although it is currently licensed, authorized, in-process, or exempt in all non-SARA jurisdictions in which it operates, if GCU fails to comply with state licensing or authorization requirements for a state, or fails to obtain licenses or authorizations when
37
Table of Contents
required, it could lose its state license or authorization by that state or be subject to other sanctions, including restrictions on its activities in, and fines and penalties imposed by, that state, as well as fines, penalties, and sanctions imposed by ED. The loss of licensure or authorization in any non-SARA state by a client institution could prohibit us from recruiting prospective students or offering services to current students in that state, which could significantly reduce our university partner’s enrollments.
Laws, regulations, or interpretations related to doing business over the Internet could also increase our cost of doing business and affect our ability to recruit students in particular states, which could, in turn, negatively affect enrollments and revenues and have a material adverse effect on our business.
Additionally, regulatory agencies may sometimes disagree with the way we have interpreted or applied these requirements. Any misinterpretation by us of these regulatory requirements or adverse changes in regulations or interpretations thereof by regulators could materially adversely affect us. If a university partner institution fails to comply with state licensing or authorization requirements for a state in which it operates, or fails to obtain licenses or authorizations when required, it could lose its state licensure or authorization by that state or be subject to other sanctions, including restrictions on its activities in, and fines and penalties imposed by, that state, as well as fines, penalties, and sanctions imposed by ED. The loss of licensure or authorization in a state other than a state in which a university partner institution is physically located could prohibit us from recruiting prospective students or assisting with offering educational services to current students in that state, which could significantly reduce enrollments.
Furthermore, our university partners must typically maintain a composite score of at least 1.5 to maintain their membership in a State Authorization Reciprocity Agreement, or SARA. Failure to maintain that score, and loss of eligibility for SARA, could result in the loss of the ability to offer online programs in various states unless the university partner is otherwise eligible to do so. This could greatly affect our ability to market our university partners’ online programs.
Government agencies, regulatory agencies, and third parties may conduct compliance reviews, bring claims, or initiate litigation against us or our university partners based on alleged violations of the extensive regulatory requirements applicable to us and our university partners, which could cause the imposition of sanctions against us or our university partners.
Because our university partner institutions operate in a highly regulated industry, they are subject to program reviews, audits, investigations, claims of non-compliance, and lawsuits by government agencies, regulatory agencies, students, employees, stockholders, and other third parties alleging non-compliance with applicable legal requirements, many of which are imprecise and subject to interpretation. Similarly, we could be subject to those same reviews. If the result of any such proceeding is unfavorable to our university partners, they may lose or have limitations imposed on their state licensing, accreditation, or Title IV program participation; be required to pay monetary damages (including triple damages in certain whistleblower suits); or be subject to fines, injunctions, or other penalties, any of which could have a material adverse effect on their business, prospects, financial condition, and results of operations. Similarly, reviews of us directly could also impose a host of limitations and monetary penalties and fines for wrongful actions on our part. Claims and lawsuits brought against us or our university partners, even if they are without merit, may also result in adverse publicity, damage our reputation, negatively affect the market price of our stock, adversely affect student enrollments, and reduce the willingness of third parties to do business with us. Even if we adequately address the issues raised by any such proceeding and successfully defend against it, we may have to devote significant financial and management resources to address these issues, which could harm our business.
The regulatory guidance governing third-party servicers imposes a number of requirements on our business and may expose us to liability for certain regulatory violations that are coextensive with our university partner institutions.
A “Third-party servicer” is any person or entity used by “any eligible institution of higher education to administer, through either manual or automated processing, any aspect of such institution’s student assistance programs.” Third party servicers have a number of requirements. For example, they must conduct and submit to ED compliance audits
38
Table of Contents
under 34 C.F.R. § 668.23. In addition, they must comply with the requirements of 34 C.F.R. § 668.25, which requires third-party servicers, in their contracts with institutions, to be contractually obligated to, among other things:
● Comply with all statutory provisions of or applicable to Title IV of the HEA, including the requirement to use any funds that the servicer administers under any Title IV, HEA program and any interest or other earnings thereon solely for the purposes specified in and in accordance with that program;
● Refer to the Office of Inspector General of ED for investigation any information indicating there is reasonable cause to believe that the institution might have engaged in fraud or other criminal misconduct in connection with the institution’s administration of any Title IV, HEA program or an applicant for Title IV, HEA program assistance might have engaged in fraud or other criminal misconduct in connection with his or her application; and
● Be jointly and severally liable with the institution to the Secretary for any violation by the servicer of any statutory provision of or applicable to Title IV of the HEA, any regulatory provision prescribed under that statutory authority, and any applicable special arrangement, agreement, or limitation entered into under the authority of statutes applicable to Title IV of the HEA.
We are also subject to a number of data security and privacy regulations given our role as a third-party servicer and these standards are evolving. To the extent we continue to provide third party servicer functions, we will be subject to these requirements, the compliance with which can materially impact our business model.
Proposed legislation, additional rulemaking or additional examinations from U.S. Congress may impact general public perception of the industry in a negative manner resulting in a material and adverse impact on our business.
The process of re-authorization of the HEA began in 2014 and is ongoing. Congressional hearings began in 2013 and will continue to be scheduled by the U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Education and the Workforce and other Congressional committees regarding various aspects of the education industry, including accreditation matters, student debt, student recruiting, cost of tuition, distance learning, competency-based learning, student success and outcomes and other matters.
Criticisms of the overall student lending and post-secondary education sectors may impact general public perceptions of educational institutions, including our university partner institutions and us, in a negative manner. Adverse media coverage regarding educational institutions – whether or not a university partner – or regarding third party services such as us directly could damage our reputation. The environment surrounding access to and the costs of student loans remains in a state of flux. The uncertainty surrounding these issues, and any resolution of these issues that increases loan costs or reduces students’ access to Title IV loans or to student extended payment plans, could reduce student demand for educational programs which would adversely impact our revenues and operating profit or result in increased regulatory scrutiny.
The increased scrutiny and results-based accountability initiatives in the education sector, as well as ongoing policy differences in Congress regarding spending levels, could lead to significant changes in connection with the reauthorization of the HEA or otherwise. These changes may place additional regulatory burdens on postsecondary schools generally, and specific initiatives may be targeted at or have an impact upon companies like us that provide services to institutions of higher education. The adoption of any laws or regulations that limit our ability to provide our bundled services to our university partners could compromise our ability to drive revenue through their programs or make our platform less attractive to them. Congress could also enact laws or regulations that require us to modify our practices in ways that could increase our costs.
Changing requirements related to data privacy may create increased costs and operational difficulties for university partner institutions and, potential for GCE.
On December 18, 2020, the ED announced that it was finalizing a new Campus Cybersecurity Program framework. This proposed multi-year phased implementation would begin with a self-assessment of the National Institute of Standards and Technology Special Publication 800–171 Rev. 2, Controlled Unclassified Information in
39
Table of Contents
Nonfederal Systems (NIST 800–171 Rev. 2) readiness and outreach activities. The ED specifically said it was “committed to fully advancing and encouraging all postsecondary institutions implementation of NIST 800-171 controls.” This announcement was addressed both to institutions of higher education and their third-party servicers.
While details related to this announcement are few, it does suggest that the ED will be taking a greater role in ensuring universities and their service providers meet NIST standards and are protecting the students and Department data received. Although management is reviewing this letter and the issues it raises, compliance with NIST will likely increase operational cost if required to come into compliance.
Risks Related to Owning our Common Stock
Provisions in our charter documents and the Delaware General Corporation Law could make it more difficult for a third party to acquire us and could discourage a takeover and adversely affect existing stockholders.
Anti-takeover provisions of our certificate of incorporation, bylaws, the Delaware General Corporation Law, or DGCL, and regulations of state and federal education agencies could diminish the opportunity for stockholders to participate in acquisition proposals at a price above the then-current market price of our common stock. For example, while we have no present plans to issue any preferred stock, our Board of Directors, without further stockholder approval, may issue shares of undesignated preferred stock and fix the powers, preferences, rights, and limitations of such class or series, which could adversely affect the voting power of your shares. In addition, our bylaws provide for an advance notice procedure for nomination of candidates to our Board of Directors that could have the effect of delaying, deterring, or preventing a change in control. Further, as a Delaware corporation, we are subject to provisions of the DGCL regarding “business combinations,” which can deter attempted takeovers in certain situations. The approval requirements of ED, our regional accrediting commission, and state post-secondary, licensure, and certification agencies for a change in control transaction could also delay, deter, or prevent a transaction that would result in a change in control. We may, in the future, consider adopting additional anti-takeover measures. The authority of our Board of Directors to issue undesignated preferred or other capital stock and the anti-takeover provisions of the DGCL, as well as other current and any future anti-takeover measures adopted by us, may, in certain circumstances, delay, deter, or prevent takeover attempts and other changes in control of the company not approved by our Board of Directors.
If securities analysts do not publish research or reports about our business or industry or if they downgrade their evaluations of our stock, the price of our stock could decline.
The activity within the trading market for our common stock depends in part on the research and reports that industry or financial analysts publish about us, our business and the for-profit education sector. In recent periods, a number of analysts have dropped coverage of the sector. If analysts cease coverage of us or additional analysts cease coverage of our sector, we could lose visibility in the market for our stock, which in turn could cause our stock price to decline. If one or more of the analysts covering us downgrade their estimates or evaluations of our stock, the price of our stock could decline.
If we fail to maintain proper and effective internal controls, our ability to produce accurate financial statements on a timely basis could be impaired.
We are subject to the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and the rules and regulations of The Nasdaq Global Select Market. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires, among other things, that we maintain effective disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting. We are required to perform system and process evaluation and testing of our internal control over financial reporting to allow management to report on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting in our Form 10-K filing for that year, as required by Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. This may require us to incur substantial additional professional fees and internal costs to further expand our accounting and finance functions and expend significant management efforts. If we are not able to comply with the requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in a timely manner, or if we are unable to maintain proper and effective internal controls, we may not be able to produce timely and accurate financial statements. If that were to happen, the market price of our stock could decline and we could be subject to sanctions or investigations by the stock exchange on which our common stock is listed, the SEC, or other regulatory authorities.
40
Table of Contents
Because we do not anticipate paying any cash dividends on our common stock in the foreseeable future, capital appreciation, if any, will be your sole source of gains and you may never receive a return on your investment.
You should not rely on an investment in our common stock to provide dividend income. We have not declared or paid cash dividends on our common stock to date. We currently intend to retain our future earnings, if any, to fund the development and growth of our business or to repurchase shares of our common stock. In addition, the terms of our existing credit facility preclude, and the terms of any future debt agreements is likely to similarly preclude, us from paying dividends. As a result, capital appreciation, if any, of our common stock will be your sole source of gain for the foreseeable future. Investors seeking cash dividends should not purchase our common stock
Other General Risks
Our success depends upon our ability to recruit and retain key personnel.
Our success to date has largely depended on, and will continue to depend on, the skills, efforts, and motivation of our executive officers, who generally have significant experience with our business and the education industry, and we may have difficulties in locating and hiring qualified personnel and in retaining such personnel once hired. In addition, other than non-compete agreements of limited duration that we have with certain executive officers, we have not historically sought non-compete agreements with key personnel and they may leave and subsequently compete against us. The loss of the services of any of our key personnel, many of whom are not party to employment agreements with us, or our failure to attract and retain other qualified and experienced personnel on acceptable terms, could cause our business to suffer.
Our credit agreement may restrict our operations and our ability to complete certain transactions.
Our credit agreement imposes certain operating restrictions on us, including limitations on our ability to incur additional debt or make certain investments, and requires us to maintain compliance with certain applicable regulatory standards. In addition, the credit agreement requires us to maintain a maximum leverage ratio, a minimum fixed charge coverage ratio and a minimum tangible net worth, in each case as such terms are defined in the credit agreement. We cannot assure you that these covenants will not adversely affect our ability to finance our future operations or capital needs or to pursue available business opportunities. A breach of any of these covenants or our inability to maintain the required financial ratios could result in a default in respect of the related indebtedness. If a default occurs, the affected lenders could elect to declare the indebtedness, together with accrued interest and other fees, to be immediately due and payable.
A failure of our information systems to properly store, process and report relevant data may reduce our management’s effectiveness, interfere with our regulatory compliance and increase our operating expenses.
We are dependent on the integrity of our data management systems. If these systems do not effectively collect, store and process relevant data for the operation of our business, whether due to equipment malfunctions or constraints, software deficiencies, or human error, our ability to effectively report, plan, forecast and execute our business plan and comply with applicable laws and regulations, including the HEA, as reauthorized, and the regulations thereunder, will be impaired, perhaps materially. Any such impairment could materially and adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows.
Occurrence of natural or man-made catastrophes could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Natural events, health epidemics (including the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic), acts of God, terrorist attacks and other acts of violence, computer cyber-terrorism or other catastrophes could result in significant worker absenteeism, increased student attrition rates for our university partners, lower asset utilization rates, voluntary or mandatory closure of facilities, our inability to meet dynamic employee health and safety requirements, our inability to meet contractual service levels, our inability to procure essential supplies, travel restrictions on our employees and other disruptions to our business. In addition, these events could adversely affect the economy, financial markets and activity levels of our
41
Table of Contents
university partners. Any of these events, their consequences or the costs related to mitigation or remediation could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments
None.
Text extracted from the filing as submitted to EDGAR. Formatting, tables and exhibits are simplified for reading; the original document is authoritative for anything you rely on.