Trending
STEUBENVILLE -- The U.S. Department of Education nixed Eastern Gateway Community College's proposed redesign of its Free College Benefit program Sept. 26, six days after it filed a 46-page response to the college's petition for an injunction blocking enforcement of government sanctions.
DOE wants the suit dismissed.
Meanwhile, the 145-member EGCC Education Association voted to send a "letter of concern" to members of the school's board of trustees over what it called "systemic issues in the college that need resolution."
Specifically, the group cited the ongoing response to the probation status issued by HLC in November; lack of transparency of the college's transition away from the Student Resource Center after its sale, and the ensuing lawsuits; and the ongoing Department of Education Program Review, which could lead to the loss of Title IV funding.
"Support staff and professional staff viscerally feel these pressing concerns directly impact the viability and integrity of the college and our ability to provide a quality educational experience for our students," the letter, signed by EGCC Education Association President Jim Corrin, noted, closing with a plea to trustees "to recognize the urgency of the issues identified above and to work diligently, transparently and immediately to resolve these issues in ways that will ensure the ongoing success of the college and quality education for all our students."
EGCC President Mike Geoghegan responded with a message of his own to staff and students, acknowledging what he called a "challenging time for the college, especially our 31,600 students and the faculty and staff who support their education goals."
"Our students remain our No. 1 priority, and (our) lawsuit seeks to protect their access to education and ensure a fair process for the college," Geoghegan wrote. "EGCC communicates with faculty, staff and other stakeholders on a weekly basis regarding updates on this pending litigation and will continue to do so …"
He also said the college is taking steps to address accreditation issues raised by the Higher Learning Commission that led to it being put on temporary probation, adding they've received "positive feedback on our HLC status progression from our HLC consultants and are on target to address issues raised by HLC."
He said teams have met about 50 times since January and have been gathering evidence to support their assurance argument, which they'll submit in January, "and will be ready for the Peer Review Evaluation (in) March."
HLC President Barbara Gellman-Dansey had provided the college with a detailed, 10-page checklist of issues that must be addressed to regain full accreditation and took aim at EGCC's meteoric growth -- from about 3,000 students in 2015 to a little more than 47,000 in 2021, most of them online. Gellman-Dansey had claimed that while revenues increased "the institution presented no evidence to support that the present business model provides a high-quality educational experience for students."
DOE claims it was in the course of "a broader program review brought about by serious concerns over mismanagement and inadequate record-keeping" at the college, including its probationary status, that they discovered EGCC was "writing off all tuition costs and fees for students that were not eligible for Pell Grants under Title IV of the Higher Education Act, and using money from students who were eligible for Title IV funds to subsidize the rest of the program."
DOE insists the Free Benefit Program assessed Pell recipients the costs of tuition and fees, but didn't assess the same tuition and fees to non-Pell recipients.
To encourage EGCC to "fix the problem and avoid additional liability," DOE said its Midwest division chief issued a "cease-and-desist" notice July 18 ordering EGCC to pause the Free College Benefit program "and not disburse Pell grant funds to any new students enrolling in (it) until the program is redesigned." The department followed that letter up in August by designating the college as Heightened Cash Management Level 2 status for Pell Grants, which means the college will have to make disbursements to students from its own institutional funds, then submit a reimbursement payment request to DOE, and also demanded the college prepare a teach-out agreement for those students.
In its redesign, submitted Aug. 10, EGCC had proposed no change in student eligibility, though it pledged to award a "FCB scholarship" to all students through the EGCC Foundation. Under the proposal, all students participating in the Free College Benefit program would receive an identical scholarship equal to tuition and fees, with all other funding sources i -- including "need-based" grants to student accounts before applying the scholarship. If the FCB scholarship generated a student credit balance, that amount would be deduced from the scholarship amount. Students could opt out.
But DOE rejected the plan, saying EGCC was free to resubmit the proposal, this time including a "detailed description" of the costs to execute the program; plans for a dedicated external funding source, including documentation of any outside groups committing funds to the program as well as the actual revenue raised by the EGCC Foundation to ensure a sustainable program; and all interim plans for the program until the college is able to raise the required funds to "financially sustain the program in its entirety, including enrollment and funding caps.
DOE disputed the college's claim of irreparable harm, saying, "It was EGCC itself that disclosed the existence of the department's program review and the cease-and-desist letter, and a party cannot manufacture irreparable harm through 'self-inflicted' harm." It also maintains it had discretionary authority to put EGCC on Heightened Cash Monitoring, so the court cannot intervene.
EGCC maintains the Department of Education "ignores the actual subject matter of this case: the arbitrary and incorrect determination that offering state-approved tuition waivers after applying Pell Grant funds violates Title IV, and significantly, the enforcement of such determination through a cease-and-desist order issued without due process and immediately effective."
"(The college) did not want to be in court," their reply said. "It was forced here after being subjected to the severe enforcement action of a cease-and-desist without any opportunity to be heard, including (DOE's) continued withholding of substantive feedback on EGCC's proposed design of the program … It is only through the court's intervention that EGCC may receive the due process to which it is entitled and enroll new and continuing students in the program."