*Please note, this website is not associated with the University of Phoenix in any way*
Return to
Home Page


University of Phoenix sucks banner

The following articles are reprinted without permission.

UNIVERSITY OF PHOENIX SUED FOR PATEN INFRINGEMENT

UNIVERSITY OF PHOENIX PARENT GUILTY OF FRAUD

FORMER CFO for APOLLO TESTIFIES

EEOC SETTLES CLAIM WITH UNIVERSITY OF PHOENIX

LOSING INTEL A BLOW TO SCHOOL

UOP FACING SECURITIES FRAUD LAWSUIT

UOP FACING EEOC SUIT

FRAUD SUIT v. APOLLO GROUP UNIT REVIVED

STUDENT RECRUITMENT TACTICS BLASTED BY FEDS

DEALING IN DIPLOMAS

AUDIT FINDS UNIVERSITY OF PHOENIX LOAN IMPROPRIETY

UOP TO PAY $2M IN OVERTIME


3 For-Profit Colleges Hit With Courseware-Patent Lawsuit
By ANDREA L. FOSTER Link
March 12, 2008

The university's search committee recommended on Thursday that Mr. Yudof, chancellor of the University of Texas system, replace Robert C. Dynes, whose term was marred by criticism over the California system's compensation practices.

Digital-Vending Services International, a company linked to a nonprofit educational group with ties to the U.S. military, has filed a patent- infringement lawsuit against three for-profit online higher-education institutions.

The suit, filed last week in the U.S. District Court in Marshall, Tex., alleges that the online colleges are infringing three patents underlying the online delivery, management, and security of course materials. The defendants are the University of Phoenix and its parent company, the Apollo Group Inc.; Walden University and its parent company, Laureate Education Inc.; and the Capella Education Company.

Digital-Vending Services, based in Washington, accuses the online institutions of inflicting "irreparable harm" on its business. The company is seeking unspecified damages and an injunction barring the institutions from "further infringement," according to the suit.

Digital-Vending was established in 2003 to protect educational-software patents held by members of the Community Learning and Information Network, a nonprofit group that develops distance-learning applications. Members affiliated with Digital-Vending have ties to the education, defense, software, and aerospace industries.

Among other products, the network created a videoconferencing and computer-based learning system for training members of the National Guard. Mac McKnight, a retired Army lieutenant general, served as the group's chairman of the board.

Pursuing For-Profit Institutions Only

William M. Parrish, a lawyer in Austin, Tex., who represents Digital-Vending, said the group would go after for-profit institutions only. But he said it was possible that nonprofit colleges were infringing Digital-Vending's courseware patents as well.

"Nonprofits don't need to worry about us chasing them," he said. "We're an ally of theirs."

Digital-Vending chose to sue in the Texas court because it is known for siding with patent holders.

Only two weeks ago, a jury in the same district of Texas awarded Blackboard, a learning-services company, $3.1-million in a courseware patent-infringement suit it brought against a much smaller Canadian rival. But Mr. Parrish said he had no knowledge of that litigation.

Spokesmen for Capella and Laureate declined to comment on the litigation. Terri Bishop, a spokeswoman for Apollo, said the company was reviewing the allegations but doubted they were valid.


University of Phoenix Parent Guilty of Fraud

The Associated Press Link
Jan. 16, 2008 12:29 PM

PHOENIX - Apollo Group Inc., the for-profit company that owns the University of Phoenix, fraudulently misled investors about its student recruitment policies, a federal jury ruled Wednesday, and was ordered to pay shareholders about $280 million.

The jury's verdict comes after a two-month trial on a civil lawsuit filed by shareholders in U.S. District Court in Phoenix. The jury's verdict specified that the company pay investors $5.55 a share.

Shareholders claimed Apollo misled investors four years ago when it kept secret a Department of Education report that criticized the University of Phoenix's recruitment policies.

The report, which was issued on Feb. 5, 2004, concluded that the University of Phoenix paid enrollment counselors “solely based on (the) recruiters' success in securing enrollments,” which violated federal regulations. It added that the university systematically keeps its incentive-based recruitment practices hidden from the Department of Education.

“Any reasonable investor, I assure you, would have wanted to know the existence of this report,” Stephen R. Basser, an attorney representing shareholders with the policemen's annuity and benefit fund of Chicago, told jurors last week in closing arguments.

The shareholders singled out former CEO Todd S. Nelson and former chief financial officer Kenda B. Gonzales as the Apollo officials who failed to inform investors about the Department of Education's report. They had demanded $5.55 a share in restitution, an amount that company officials said would amount to $280 million, and the jury agreed after two days of deliberation.

Nelson and Gonzales both left the company in 2006.

Apollo argued that the report was largely false and based on anecdotal evidence. Therefore, the company said, its failure to disclose its existence to investors was not misleading.

Nevertheless, the University of Phoenix agreed in September 2004 to pay the Department of Education $9.8 million to settle the matter. When news of the report was made public later that month, Apollo's stock dropped significantly.

Wayne W. Smith, a lawyer for Apollo, told jurors in closing arguments that the report was “seriously flawed” and made the university look like a diploma mill.

Last week, Smith showed jurors company documents that suggested the university's recruiters were not paid directly in relation to the number of students they signed up. The company says a number of factors determine recruiter salaries, including how well recruited students do in school, the retention rate of their students and how well the recruiter works with other school advisers.

Smith also disputed claims by shareholders that the university was turning to unqualified students to keep their enrollment numbers high.

“There's no benefit to the university for people who can't hack it,” Smith told jurors. “They just take one class at a time, and if they drop out, they get a prorata refund.”

Former CFO for Apollo Testifies

Link
She says U.S. Education report was withheld to avoid media
Bloomberg News
Dec. 7, 2007 12:00 AM

A former chief financial officer for Apollo Group Inc. told jurors Thursday that the company withheld a U.S. Education Department report from investors to avoid news coverage of the allegations.

Kenda Gonzales testified in a securities class-action trial against the owner of the for-profit University of Phoenix.

"When we received the program-review report, we felt very strongly we did not want it basically tried in the press," Gonzales told the federal court jury in Phoenix. advertisement

The issue stems from a February 2004 report in which Education Department regulators accused Apollo of violating federal bans on paying staff based on the numbers of students they enrolled.

Apollo, which had previously disclosed audits and investigations by the Education Department going back to the 1990s, neglected to make that report known in its filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

Former Apollo Chief Executive Officer Todd Nelson testified last week that company officials didn't agree with the report's allegations and that lawyers advised against disclosing it. He also told the jury that he thought disclosing it would have caused the company's stock price to fall.

In a statement, Apollo said it "acted transparently and in good faith, consulted with professional advisors as appropriate, and at all times communicated truthfully to the market.''

"Importantly, the ultimate disclosure of the report's contents caused no statiscally significant movement in Apollo's stock price. The plaintiff in this case did not suffer any damages; there simply was no loss associated with the initial report and its unsubstantiated allegations.''

The report became public in September 2004, when The Arizona Republic broke the story.

The Apollo case is unusual because few securities class-action cases go to trial. The case is the 19th securities class action to do so since 1996, according to RiskMetrics Group, a financial-analytics company.

In the Apollo trial, which began in Phoenix on Nov. 14, shareholders accuse Nelson, Gonzales and the Phoenix-based company of making false and misleading statements by failing to disclose the Education Department report. Under a 1992 statute, Schools whose students receive federally guaranteed tuition loans can't pay enrollment counselors a commission or other incentive payment based on the number of students they enroll.

Seven months after receiving the report, Apollo settled the matter by paying a $9.8 million fine without conceding rules violations. It was only after the settlement was announced that the contents of the report became public in news stories.

After The Republic broke the story, the paper did follow-up articles questioning why the report wasn't publicly disclosed and whether executives misled investors with their statements about the investigation that led to the settlement.

The lead plaintiff in the case, the Policemen's Annuity and Benefit Fund of Chicago, seeks as much as $300 million in damages on behalf of those who bought the company's shares from Feb. 27, 2004, to Sept. 14, 2004. Apollo's lawyers have argued that the decision to withhold the report was prudent because the allegations were based on a flawed review of the company's compensation practices.

The Education Department's investigation was triggered by a lawsuit filed in California in March 2003 by two University of Phoenix enrollment counselors who said they and their colleagues were paid based on the number of students they enrolled.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in 2006 reversed the trial court's dismissal of that case. Apollo Group appealed that ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court.


EEOC Settles Claim with University of Phoenix

Associated Press - August 29, 2007 6:35 PM ET

SANTA TERESA, N.M. (AP) - The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has settled a sexual harassment claim against the University of Phoenix's campus in Santa Teresa.

The commission says Lorreta Grado was subjected to sexually offensive comments and conduct by a high-ranking management official at the campus.

A lawsuit filed by the EEOC on behalf of Grado said the woman also was punished for complaining about the harassment by being denied a promotion.

As part of the settlement, the EEOC says the university will pay Grado and her attorney $225,000.

Grado also will receive a letter of reference and a letter of apology.

The settlement also requires the university to train its New Mexico employees to prevent sex discrimination and retaliation.



Losing Intel a Blow to School

Dawn Gilbertson
The Arizona Republic
Dec. 5, 2006 12:00 AM


With about $2 billion in annual revenue and 300,000 students worldwide, University of Phoenix parent Apollo Group can easily weather the loss of Intel Corp.'s business.

But the prestigious chipmaker's decision to exclude the for-profit school, among others, from the list of approved schools in its tuition reimbursement program clearly stings, as Intel was a longtime customer.

And it will hurt worse if other high-profile employers follow Intel's lead of tying approval to a school's accreditation, or if prospective students outside the company view it as a mark against the university's programs - even though Intel says it's not a statement against for-profit schools. advertisement

Intel's move, which became effective Nov. 1, comes as the nation's largest private university is struggling with dramatically slower enrollment growth from demographic and economic changes and its own missteps. Apollo's stock is way off its highs and several executives have left.

CEO Brian Mueller was unavailable for an interview Monday. Spokeswoman Ayla Dickey issued a statement saying the loss of new Intel business won't have a "material financial impact" on Apollo, meaning it isn't significant enough to warrant disclosure by a public company.

The company said it just learned of Intel's new policy - it was disclosed to employees in a memo late last week - and hopes it will reconsider given the long-standing relationship between the two.

Intel executive Alan Fisher, manager of global extended education programs, said he had several discussions with a top Apollo executive about the changes when they were under consideration. The executive recently left the company.

Intel is raising the standards in its tuition reimbursement program in a bid to create what Fisher calls a world-class program. Intel noticed higher-than-normal attrition among employees who had taken classes on the company's dime and set out to find out why.

A big finding: Some workers left or were planning to leave because their new degree didn't help them advance at Intel, Fisher said.

Competition is stiff for promotions and new jobs at Intel, with a top-notch education often a deciding point for those who score interviews, Fisher said. Plus, the company only recruits recent college graduates from first-rate, traditional universities. The new standards are designed to level the playing field, he said.

"We would be wasting their time and wasting our money if we didn't make sure that the education that they are getting can be used at Intel," he said.

There are currently about 600 Intel employees enrolled. They will be able to finish their degrees and be reimbursed for the cost.

The policy dictates that the company will only pay for students who enroll in degree programs accredited by the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) or ABET, an accrediting body for engineering and technology programs.

University of Phoenix has long bragged that it had the same general regional accreditation as Arizona State University, Harvard, Yale and others.

That's true, but what it didn't say was that those schools also have additional accreditation for specialized programs like business and engineering. That's where AACSB and ABET come in. Schools must go through a rigorous process to earn accreditation. At AACSB, it takes three to seven years to gain accreditation, President John Fernandes said. Once accredited, they are re-examined every five years.

What sets the 90-year-old group apart, he said, is its intense focus on faculty credentials and continuity, admissions standards and graduation rates, research, libraries, and student resources, among a host of other factors.

Just 530 of 9,000 business schools worldwide have the accreditation. None is for-profit.

Fernandes said University of Phoenix probably wouldn't make the cut unless it changed the makeup of its faculty, which he called nomadic. The school prides itself on its lineup of teachers with work experience, but most are part time. At AACSB schools, the majority of the faculty is full time and have a long relationship with the school, he said.

Fernandes said he is aware of companies who direct employees to AACSB schools as a practice but has not seen any employer come out with a requirement like Intel.

"It sounds to me like Intel wants to make sure that the money they're spending for executive education has some quality assurance behind it," he said.

Faith Ivery thinks Intel has gone too far at the expense of many of its employees, especially those who don't want to rapidly climb the corporate ladder.

"Not everyone wants to be their top engineer," said the founder and president of Scottsdale-based Educational Advisory Services, which helps companies craft and manage tuition reimbursement programs.

Ivery said the new policy severely limits employees' choices, something working adults need to complete a degree or get an advanced degree.

For-profit schools like University of Phoenix build their models around choice and flexibility, with online degrees, part-time classes and more. Intel is clearly favoring traditional schools, she said.

"It's absolutely ludicrous what they're doing," she said of Intel's move.

Fisher acknowledges Intel set the standards "extremely high" with its new policy. He does not rule out changes as it studies the impact and said he likely will re-examine the program in a year.


Brower Piven Announces Class Action Lawsuit Against Apollo Group, Inc.

Sunday November 5, 11:44 am ET

BALTIMORE, MD--(MARKET WIRE)--Nov 5, 2006 -- The law firm of Brower Piven, A Professional Corporation, today announced that a securities class action was commenced on behalf of shareholders who purchased or otherwise acquired the common stock of Apollo Group, Inc. (NASDAQ:APOL - News) between November 28, 2001 and October 18, 2006, inclusive (the "Class Period").

The case is pending in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona against defendant Apollo Group, Inc. and one or more of its officers and/or directors. The action charges that defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of materially false and misleading statements to the market throughout the Class Period, which statements had the effect of artificially inflating the market price of the Company's securities.

No class has yet been certified in the above action. If you are a member of the proposed class, you may retain counsel of your choice, and you may move the court no later than January 2, 2007 to serve as a lead plaintiff for the proposed class. In order to serve as a lead plaintiff, you must meet certain legal requirements. To be a member of the proposed class you need not take any action at this time.

If you acquired shares (or purchased call options or sold put options) of Apollo Group, Inc. during the Class Period indicated and want to discuss your legal rights, you may e-mail or call Brower Piven, who will, without obligation or cost to you, attempt to answer your questions. David Brower and Charles Piven have combined experience in securities and class action litigation of over 40 years. You may contact Brower Piven at The World Trade Center-Baltimore, 401 East Pratt Street, Suite 2525, Baltimore, Maryland 21202, by email at
hoffman@browerpiven.com or by calling 410/986-0036.

Univ. of Phoenix Facing EEOC Suit

Dawn Gilbertson
The Arizona Republic
Sept. 27, 2006 05:07 PM

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has sued the University of Phoenix, alleging religious discrimination against non-Mormon enrollment counselors.

The federal lawsuit, announced a day after the country's largest private university signed on as the naming sponsor of the Arizona Cardinals stadium, says the company treated employees who were not members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints less favorably when it came to sharing leads on new students, tuition waivers and reprimands.

The school, owned by publicly traded Apollo Group Inc., has 4,400 enrollment counselors, including 2,600 in Phoenix.

"We have found a pattern of practice at this very large company of preferring LDS workers over non-LDS workers," said Mary Jo O'Neill, regional attorney for the watchdog agency. It filed the lawsuit Monday in U.S. District Court in Phoenix.Apollo spokesman Joe Cockrell said the company hasn't seen the lawsuit but in a statement he emphasized that the 15,000-employee company has "always been guided by equal opportunity and respect for others.""We maintain a strict anti-discrimination and anti-harassment policy and take a zero-tolerance stance on these issues," the statement said.

The University of Phoenix and Apollo have been dogged by murmurs of Mormon influence for years. Apollo's longtime president and chief executive officer, Todd Nelson, was active in the church. He left the company unexpectedly in January.New president Brian Mueller is not Mormon, nor is Apollo founder and chairman John Sperling.

O'Neill said the UOP case reflects a broader trend the agency is seeing of "intolerance in the workplace for people of other religions."

Last year, the agency settled two cases alleging discrimination against non-Mormon employees at Desert Schools Federal Credit Union and the Fairmont Scottsdale Princess. Overall, it currently has several religious discrimination lawsuits in litigation, she said.

"It's not OK for employers to prefer a group of people because of their religion or to discriminate or adversely impact them in any way in their job because they don't belong to a certain religion," she said. "That's what you have in this case."

Katherine Kruse, an EEOC trial attorney in Phoenix, said the agency's investigation revealed "LDS favoritism in both initial assessment of leads and redistribution of leads."

The University of Phoenix recruits students through Internet advertising and other sources, and those leads are funneled to enrollment counselors working at call centers.

Former enrollment counselor Bob Lein, who filed a complaint with the EEOC in 2003 and is named in the lawsuit, said Mormon managers on his team at the University of Phoenix Online gave the best leads or extra leads and student registrations to "their Mormon friends on the team."

"They would get more enrollments, they'd get good reviews and some of them got promoted out of it," he said. "They took care of them."

Lein, who calls himself a non-denominational Christian, said his enrollment numbers fell, so he was reprimanded and ultimately fired two years ago. The EEOC lawsuit also says he was terminated in retaliation for complaining about discrimination.

One of the former workers named in the lawsuit was initially denied tuition waivers the company offers as a job perk.

The lawsuit seeks relief on behalf of Lein, three other named individuals and an undetermined number of other affected employees and former employees.

The EEOC is seeking back pay, damages for emotional distress and punitive damages. No court date has been set.


Fraud Suit V. Apollo Group Unit Revived
Tuesday September 5, 5:38 pm ET

Court Revives Whistleblower Suit Versus Apollo Group Unit

WILMINGTON, Del. (AP) -- A federal appeals court in San Francisco Tuesday revived a lawsuit that claims Apollo Group Inc.'s University of Phoenix defrauded the federal government out of hundreds of millions of dollars.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed a ruling that dismissed a whistleblower lawsuit started by two former enrollment counselors at the university, Mary Hendow and Julie Albertson. The two claim the University of Phoenix falsely certifies to the U.S. Department of Education that it does not pay incentive compensation based on how many students counselors can sign up. A spokesman for the school could not immediately be reached for comment on the ruling, which allows the lawsuit to move to the next stage.

To get certain federal subsidies, schools are supposed to avoid paying commissions, bonuses or other incentives to recruiters who sign up the most students.

The incentive compensation ban is supposed to help keep the government from picking up the tab for poorly qualified students who will not be able to repay student loans. Some loans come directly from the Department of Education. Other student loans come from private lenders, but are federally insured. Hendow and Albertson sued in the name of the government, alleging the University of Phoenix does not comply with the ban, but collects federal subsidies anyway. The case was dismissed at the pretrial stage in 2004, but the U.S. Department of Justice joined in the effort to get it reinstated on appeal.

Student-recruitment tactics blasted by feds

Univ. of Phoenix audit leads to $9.8 mil fine

Dawn Gilbertson
The Arizona Republic
Sept. 14, 2004 12:00 AM

A government review of the University of Phoenix, the country's largest for-profit university, paints a picture of a school so hungry to enroll new students that it has threatened and intimidated its recruitment staff in meetings and e-mail, pressured them to enroll unqualified students and covered up its practices to deceive regulators.

In a 45-page report obtained by The Arizona Republic, the U.S. Department of Education describes corporate culture overly focused on boosting enrollment. The review, based on site visits and interviews with more than 60 employees and former employees, led to the largest settlement of its kind last week. The Phoenix-based university agreed to pay $9.8 million without admitting any wrongdoing. The report did not address the University of Phoenix's educational quality.

Todd Nelson, chairman and chief executive officer of University of Phoenix parent Apollo Group Inc., called the critical portrait of the school's recruiting practices "very, very unfair" and inaccurate.

"That's not how we do it," he said.

The Program Review Report details several examples of compensation and sales practices the department says range from illegal to unethical to aggressive. Federal law governing financial aid prohibits basing college recruiters' pay on enrollment.

The allegation of hard-sell tactics contrasts with the image the University of Phoenix has cultivated of non-stop demand from working adults who want to better their careers with their employers usually picking up the tuition.

In the report, enrollment counselors interviewed by regulators told of a glassed-in isolation room, called the Red Room, where underperformers were put on display to work the phones under intense management supervision.

A group of San Jose recruiters recalled being told heads would be on a chopping block if its numbers didn't come up; another recruiter said her manager told her she couldn't afford time away from the phone to go to New York for her grandmother's funeral.

Telemarketing and sales are pressure-cooker jobs no matter what the field, but the rules are different when education is being pitched and taxpayer funds are involved. The Department of Education oversees federal financial-aid programs and has strict rules against paying recruiters based on the number of students they enroll. The regulations are in place to protect prospective students from being pressured and taxpayers from potential defaults on student loans. About 60 percent of the school's tuition revenue comes from financial aid.

Regulators said they found several violations of this law at the University of Phoenix as evidenced by the focus on enrollment numbers at the expense of more qualitative job measures. The report ordered changes. The school received the report in February and responded to it before settling.

The Department of Education said the university was in violation because it:


• "Hires its recruiters with the promise of lucrative compensation for success in securing enrollments."
• "Maintains a recruiter evaluation and salary system that provides incentive payments based both directly and indirectly on success in securing enrollments."
• "Provides substantial incentives to its staff to recruit unqualified students and students who cannot benefit from the training offered."
• "Systematically and intentionally operates in a duplicitous manner so as to violate the department's prohibition against incentive compensation while evading detection."

The settlement resolved all issues in the report.

Broad scope

Nelson said the report, which covers September 1998 through the end of February, was based mainly on interviews with a small group of disgruntled employees and former employees, some involved in a lawsuit filed last year against the company and since dismissed. The government says it interviewed more than 60 people. Nelson says the university has about 5,000 enrollment counselors, 3,000 of them in Phoenix.

He said that outside auditors the company hired to review its compensation plans found no violations of the law and that interviews it conducted with employees didn't turn up the problems cited in the report.

The company did change its recruiter compensation plan in June to make it clearer for regulators, Nelson said.

He said the fact that the government settled the probe speaks for itself. "If we were guilty of everything being said in that report, there's no way they'd be willing to reach a settlement or no way they'd be willing to sign a settlement agreement that says there is no admission of guilt," he said.

Nelson suggested the department overstepped its bounds with the scope of its report.

"It talks about things that really have nothing to do with what the (recruiter compensation) law is," he said, adding that it is not illegal, for example, to fire someone for not enrolling enough students.

Susan Aspey, spokeswoman for the Education Department, said it stands by the report: "We are both firm and fair in our administration of the law, and we act in the best interests of the students and taxpayers. This is the largest fine the department has ever imposed on a school."

Industry scrutiny

The critical report and settlement come amid intense regulatory scrutiny on the for-profit education industry, which has enjoyed soaring growth and rich success on Wall Street. Apollo's stock alone is up 11,000 percent in the past decade.

A couple of Apollo's competitors are reportedly under federal investigation involving financial-aid fraud, and their stocks have sunk.

Apollo has remained the star of the industry, especially in Wall Street's eyes, but a few warts have emerged this year. This summer, the University of Phoenix settled two cases with the U.S. Department of Labor over unpaid overtime for approximately $6 million.

Last week, in addition to the $9.8 million settlement for the University of Phoenix, it agreed to pay $4.4 million to settle a long-running audit of its small Institute for Professional Development.

Company executives and Wall Street analysts hailed last week's settlements as removing a cloud hanging over Apollo. Details of the report were not public at the time.

Nelson referred to the negative tone of the report in a conference call with analysts and investors the day the settlement was announced but gave no hint of its harshness.

Asked by an analyst what wrongdoing the Department of Education had found in its review, Nelson said the school's recruiter pay plan wasn't out of compliance; what was flawed was how the school administered it. He said the new compensation plan, which was planned before the government review, resolved those issues.

Misleading practices

The report says school officials took steps to deceive or thwart regulators during the review, which included on-site visits in Arizona and California a year ago.

It says some managers in northern California told certain recruiters with a reputation for being outspoken to take leave or be out of the office during the review. Others told of posted materials ranking employees by enrollment performance coming down in advance of the visit. In one case, a recruiter saved a computer spreadsheet that had been displayed before the visit and showed it to regulators. In another, Monopoly money used in a contest to drum up applications was taken off a bulletin board, the report says.

Overall, some employees interviewed said that an elaborate pay matrix was about "smoke and mirrors" and that the only thing that counted was enrollments.

Rick Knight, 49, of Ahwatukee, left the University of Phoenix last year after about two years as an enrollment counselor. He recalls constant threats about keeping the numbers up. He said he was a star performer in the beginning, receiving a $21,000 raise after eight months for enrolling 89 students in the period. But as the school added hundreds of recruiters, there were too few leads to go around.

Nelson said the school has more leads now than it ever has.

Knight was not among the employees interviewed for the program review, but an overtime claim he filed was among those that launched the Department of Labor investigation.

In late 2002, Knight, who has spent much of his career in sales, said he was sent to the Red Room for six weeks, a process he calls humiliating. He says he quit shortly thereafter.

"I have never had a negative review written up about me in my entire employment until I went there," he said.

Dealing in Diplomas

For the University of Phoenix, College is a Big Business - and Getting Bigger

01:36 PM CST on Saturday, February 28, 2004

By KATHERINE YUNG / The Dallas Morning News

PHOENIX – Critics dub the University of Phoenix "McUniversity" and "Drive Thru-U." But from its base in this sprawling desert metropolis, the nation's largest private university is shrugging off the nicknames and expanding its reach. Its mission: to turn quality higher education into a lucrative business.

The university's parent company, the Apollo Group, boasts a market capitalization larger than Southwest Airlines'. Profits have multiplied fiftyfold over the last decade. And the meteoric rise in the company's stock price has propelled Apollo founder John Sperling to billionaire status.

Now the champion of education for working adults is training its sights on traditional college students. It plans to serve that market by opening Axia College in Phoenix during the next few months.

"The good news is that because of responsible management, we can accomplish both" quality education and profits, says Todd Nelson, Apollo's chief executive.

Over the last 28 years, the University of Phoenix has built up a moneymaking machine that stretches from cyberspace to campuses and learning centers in 29 states, including Texas.

The key to its business model: keeping costs down while generating new sources of revenue. Fueling all of this is an aggressive marketing campaign, student financial support from employers and the federal government, and a network of lobbyists.

But in its quest for higher profits, some of Phoenix's practices have come under government scrutiny. Two employees have sued the school for billions of dollars, alleging that the university pays enrollment counselors based on the number of students they sign up. And not everyone agrees that the university can serve Wall Street's needs without compromising academic quality.

"One cannot serve two masters," says James Samels, president of the Education Alliance, a consulting firm in Framingham, Mass. "They've got investors, and they have a different mission."

Investors have much to cheer about. Profits totaled $247 million in the fiscal year ended Aug. 31, skyrocketing from $4.9 million in 1994 when Apollo went public. The company's total expenses as a percentage of revenue have been steadily dropping.

With no debt and a $564 million cash cushion, Apollo is positioning the University of Phoenix to become an even bigger force in the $280 billion higher education market. As enrollment expands, so will its influence on everything from teaching methods to distributing student loans, experts say. Already, Apollo's $13-plus billion market capitalization far exceeds the endowments of nearly every private college except Harvard University.

"There's really nothing that limits their expansion," says David Breneman, dean of the University of Virginia's Curry School of Education. "They will go wherever there's money to be made."

With more than 186,000 students in 91 countries, the university is on the verge of winning a license to operate in New York state. And in Texas, it's close to gaining regulators' permission to expand beyond its 5,000 students in Dallas and Houston into Austin and San Antonio.

Keeping costs low

Phoenix gears its classes toward working adults, a growing market that schools have long ignored. Gone are the dormitories, student unions, athletic facilities, health service centers and other costly frills. Classrooms are in rented office space. And the only library Phoenix maintains is online .

But the biggest cost savings come from its faculty. Most of Phoenix's instructors hold full-time jobs and only teach nights and weekends. Phoenix pays professors $1,000 to $1,500 on average for a five- or six-week class.

Professors don't get tenure, but they also don't have to design their own courses. That's done for them by groups of Phoenix faculty members who develop the school's curriculum, then roll it out to instructors across the university. The process ensures that a business major in Atlanta learns the same thing as one in Chicago.

In addition, faculty members teach 20 to 24 hours a course instead of the typical 40 because Phoenix students spend many hours on group projects without faculty supervision. These hours and the ready-made curriculum enable the university to find a steady supply of instructors at a lower rate of pay.

"It produces a labor supply for them that they can get at a pretty good price," the University of Virginia's Mr. Breneman says.

"If the typical class enrolls 20 students at $800 tuition each, revenue equals $16,000. If the faculty member is paid $1,600 to $2,000, that leaves at least $14,000 to cover all other costs plus profit. So long as demand remains strong, UOP is a veritable money machine," he writes in his upcoming book on for-profit schools.

The university has also centralized accounting, human resources and student services functions. That enables Phoenix to break even in new markets in less than a year on average.

"A big part of why for-profit education can be successful is economies of scale," says Sean Gallagher, an analyst at Eduventures Inc. in Boston.

But generating revenue is every bit as important as containing costs. The more students Phoenix enrolls, the more money it makes.

Over the years, Phoenix has mastered the art of getting students in the door. In 2002, it spent $32.7 million on advertising for both its online and campus programs, more than any other school except fellow for-profit competitor DeVry University, according to TNS Media Intelligence/CMR.

But the sales pitch doesn't end there. Phoenix excels at helping students who call or visit one of its campuses for the first time, says Robert Tucker, a former Phoenix senior vice president who is now an executive vice president at Cardean University, an online school.

Enrollment counselors help potential students overcome obstacles and follow up with e-mails outlining when courses start and what financial aid is available.

"You are just so relieved that someone has put to rest all of these little nagging problems that you are not going to search anywhere else," Mr. Tucker says.

Selling education

To attract students and maximize revenue, the university offers a growing array of year-round bachelor's, master's and doctoral degree programs in popular fields such as business, health care, education and information technology. You won't find geology or political science majors at this school.

And almost anyone can get in. To qualify for its bachelor's degree program, students must be at least 21 years old, employed and have a high school diploma or GED.

Once the students are in the door, the university earns money a second way. It gives students the option of buying instructional materials online instead of purchasing textbooks from a bookstore.

Mr. Nelson, Apollo's CEO, calls the materials, which are known as rEsource, superior to textbooks because they include simulations, training courses and other study aids. The bulk of Phoenix's students will be using rEsource by the end of March, he says.

At a price tag of about $60 a student per course, rEsource is expected to generate thousands of additional dollars once its development costs have been paid off.

"It's a beautiful, beautiful thing," says Mark DeFusco, CEO of Vatterott College in St. Louis and a former Apollo vice president. "rEsource is pure bottom line. Publishers should be scared."

Still, the bulk of the university's revenue comes from tuition. Phoenix's business model relies heavily on the federal government and the corporations that fund the students' education. The school lacks an endowment and doesn't receive government appropriations or charitable gifts.

Phoenix isn't cheap. It prices its courses in the middle of the market – higher than most public schools but lower than many private ones. Annual tuition increases are about 5 percent for campus-based classes and about 4 percent for its online program.

Many students say they couldn't afford to attend without tuition assistance. Take Tim Syring, a 43-year-old computer systems analyst in Dayton, Ohio. His employer is picking up the tab for the master's degree that he plans to earn from Phoenix Online this spring.

"Had I had to pay for it, I don't think I could afford graduate school at this time," says Mr. Syring, referring to the $1,620 in tuition for the course he is taking.

Half of Phoenix's students receive tuition assistance from their employers. And the university derives 62 percent of its net revenue from students who receive help from the federal government's Title IV student financial aid programs. Phoenix is the largest recipient of these federal funds.

But in the last five years, Phoenix and Apollo have come under scrutiny over their compliance with rules regarding these funds.

In March 2000, Apollo agreed to pay $6 million to settle charges stemming from a U.S. Department of Education audit. The audit found Phoenix did not meet conditions for including study group meetings as instructional hours, erred in including cost-of-living expenses for some students when determining financial need and committed other violations.

Phoenix disagreed with the audit findings – which sought the return of nearly $55 million in federal loans and grants – but said it agreed to the settlement to avoid a costly appeals battle.

The settlement came less than a year after the Department of Education ordered Phoenix to pay $650,000 because it didn't refund loans and grants in a timely manner when students receiving federal financial aid dropped out.

More troubles

The fine and settlement didn't end the school's legal troubles. Today, Phoenix faces a lawsuit that could cost it billions.

Last year, Mary Hendow and Julie Albertson, two of Phoenix's enrollment counselors in Northern California, filed a qui tam whistleblower lawsuit against the university, alleging that it defrauded the U.S. government out of more than $3 billion over six years.

The two women accuse Phoenix of basing the pay of enrollment counselors on the number of students they sign up. In 1992, the government banned incentive compensative for college recruiters to stop for-profit schools from signing up unqualified students simply to get federal aid money.

The lawsuit alleges that Phoenix alters documents, maintains fake files and uses code terms to deceive the U.S. Department of Education about its compensation practices.

"It's all about the numbers," one top executive is alleged to have said. "It will always be about the numbers. But we need to show the Department of Education what they want to see."

Apollo has denied the allegations, and the federal government opted not to join the lawsuit. Phoenix has filed a motion to dismiss the case. A federal judge in Sacramento, Calif., is expected to rule on the motion any day.

Mr. Nelson says money is the motivation for the lawsuit. Under a qui tam action, whistleblowers normally earn 15 percent to 25 percent of whatever money the government recovers to compensate them for their efforts and risks.

Ms. Hendow and Ms. Albertson declined to comment because they still work for the university. But Daniel Bartley, one of their lawyers, said in a release: "Hendow and Albertson did not file this lawsuit because of the monetary recovery. This lawsuit was never about the money for them. ... They filed because the University of Phoenix was requiring them to break the law to do their job."

Mr. Bartley says the Department of Education is conducting an investigation into Phoenix's compensation practices. The department will only say that it is conducting a program review, an evaluation it performs on institutions that receive federal higher education funds. Mr. Nelson confirmed the program review but says there is no investigation.

Phoenix's reliance on government financial aid programs has also led to criticism that it and other for-profit schools are gobbling up a growing share of this aid with little public accountability. Phoenix dismisses this accusation.

"There shouldn't be a distinction between for-profit and non-profit education," says Mr. Nelson, citing Phoenix's high graduation rate and low default rate on student loans.

But Phoenix isn't run like a traditional nonprofit school. The amount of pay and other compensation that Apollo's top executives take home depends on whether they meet earnings goals set at the beginning of each fiscal year.

Phoenix's success has led to enormous rewards for Mr. Nelson, who received a bonus of nearly $4 million on top of his $500,000 salary last year. In comparison, Harvard president Lawrence Summers earned about $450,110 in 2002.

To boost revenues, the university is taking aim at new markets.

It wants to expand its reach beyond major metropolitan areas with a product called FlexNet. Students in Wichita, Kan., Boise, Idaho, and other cities too small to support a campus can take the first and last weeks of a course in a classroom and do the rest online.

FlexNet has attracted 7,000 students even as it reduces the amount of classroom space the university needs to lease.

And now Apollo is gearing up Axia College for Generation Y. More than a year's worth of educational research went into the making of this school, which will be a part of Apollo-owned Western International University in Phoenix.

Although most of Phoenix's students are between the ages of 26 and 45, Axia is geared toward working adults ages 18 to 23. Phoenix came up with the concept after receiving thousands of calls from people too young to enroll in its classes, Mr. Nelson says.

If it succeeds, watch for the school to spread across the country just like the University of Phoenix has. But for now, Apollo is taking a wait-and-see approach.

"If by the end of the year we have 90 or 100 students, I'll be surprised," Mr. Nelson says. "If it goes well and there's a demand for it, then obviously in later years it will grow to be larger."

Lobbying strength

Apollo has the resources to see that Axia succeeds.

Its army of lobbyists monitor state legislation for proposed laws that could have a negative effect on Phoenix, says Laura Palmer Noone, the university's president. And they've proved adept at altering Department of Education rules for the university's benefit.

Thanks to their efforts, a Phoenix course no longer needs to provide 12 hours of instruction a week for its students to receive federal financial aid. One day of instruction or examination per week will do, but under the new rule a "day" isn't clearly defined.

Yet for all its political prowess, Phoenix stirs up plenty of debate. Student opinions of the school run the gamut from delight to disgust.

"It definitely helped me refine my skills," says Jake Rich, who graduated from Phoenix Online with a bachelor's degree in 2003. "I'm happy I went there."

But the 28-year-old network administrator in Murrieta, Calif., says he wouldn't recommend the school to others because there are less expensive online courses available at public universities.

"University of Phoenix is very expensive," he says.

Others are less enchanted.

In Dallas, Richard Quiroga, 39, dropped out of his fifth Phoenix class last year after he couldn't find a study group needed for his communication skills course.

So far, the school has called Mr. Quiroga only to get him to pay his bill for the course he dropped. The stay-at-home father has yet to hear from any counselors who could help him find a way to get the bachelor's degree he wants.

"They don't really care," he says.

Phoenix insists it doesn't cut corners to make a profit. Academic budgets are created from the ground up, not dictated from the top down, Mr. Nelson says. And the academic and business sides have an equal voice in running the school, Ms. Noone adds.

But what happens when academic and business interests clash? Academics win, Mr. Nelson says.

"Our interest is the long-term financial and academic health of this company," he says. "And how do you do that? You do that by not shortchanging what needs to be done out at the campuses."


AUDIT FINDS UNIVERSITY OF PHOENIX LOAN IMPROPRIETY
New York Times (May 17, 2000)

The University of Phoenix, a leader in providing higher education to adults, has improperly allowed students to obtain millions of dollars in federal loans and grants, the inspector general for the Department of Education has found.

The government's review concluded that students had obtained more than $50.6 million in federal loans and $4 million in Pell Grants in excess of the amounts they were entitled to receive. The financial aid is granted to students to help with tuition and other expenses. The audit recommended that the university pay back the money.

The parent company of the university, the Apollo Group of Phoenix, disputed the auditors' findings in documents released with the report March 31. But a spokeswoman with the Department of Education said that the company had agreed to a $6 million settlement at the time of the report.

From October 1995 through September 1997, the university, which is run as a for-profit business, distributed $339 million in federal loans and nearly $9 million in Pell Grants, awards that help low-income families pay for college. When the report was issued, Todd S. Nelson, the president of the Apollo Group, said in a statement, ''There is no basis either in statute or regulation for this assessment.''

Government auditors found that the school did not provide its students enough instructional time to qualify for much of the federalloans and grants. The university also included cost-of-living expenses inappropriately when determining financial need forstudents enrolled in correspondence courses, the review found.

The university measures its educational programs in credit hours,but does not use a semester, trimester or quarter system.

To receive federal funds, institutions that do not follow thestandard approach must provide 12 hours of regularly scheduledinstruction, examinations or preparation for examinations during eachweek of instructional time. This regulation requires the equivalentof at least 360 instructional hours per academic year.

The inspector general found that the university's academic year provided only 180 instructional hours, with the university relying primarily on student study groups instead of classroom time.

As a response to these findings, the University changed the study group program. Students are expect to meet for 4 hours per week to work on assignments. They must log all of their activities. UOP appears to have the government fooled. Anyone with common sense knows that only the most dedicated groups of students will get together for all 4 hours and/or make good constructive use of this time. How long do you think it takes the students to figure out how to fake the study logs? Does anyone really believe that a group of students hanging out for 4 hours is a substitute for 4 hours of classroom time?


Apollo Group to pay $2 million in OT
Univ. of Phoenix workers denied pay

Craig Harris
The Arizona Republic
Jun. 18, 2004 12:00 AM

The University of Phoenix, which offers higher education programs for working adults, has agreed to pay at least $2 million to current and former employees who were denied overtime pay, the U.S. Labor Department said Thursday.

"Today's action and our new overtime security rules reflect our commitment to protecting overtime rights," Secretary of Labor Elaine Chao said in a statement. "These employees weren't receiving their rightful pay, and we're taking action."

The department's wage and hour division conducted the investigation, which found that online admissions department employees, including some who worked up to 60 hours per week, did not receive overtime pay. The inquiry was from Nov. 30, 2001, to May 31 of this year.

The employees were responsible for contacting prospective students by telephone and selling them the university's online degree programs, the government said.

Company records are being used to calculate the amount of back wages owed to 2,600 current and former employees.

Federal law requires that non-exempt employees who work more than 40 hours a week be paid 1.5 times their regular rate of pay.

In a statement issued by the school, Todd S. Nelson, president and chief executive officer of parent Apollo Group Inc., said, "We truly appreciate the professionalism demonstrated by Department of Labor officials in resolving this complex issue for our University of Phoenix Online employees."

Apollo said the two sides had reached an agreement regarding the exemption status of University of Phoenix Online enrollment advisers.

Apollo, a $1.3 billion company, said it had reserved up to $3 million to pay the settlement.

Are you currently a student at the UoP? An ex-student?
Do you have an experience to share on this website? Please
Email us!


University of Phoenix Sucks.com ©2000-2008 -- Last Updated March 22, 2008