[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 157 (2011), Part 3]
[Senate]
[Pages 3995-3996]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                    WESTWOOD COLLEGE AND THE GI BILL

  Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, I have come to the Senate floor a number 
of times over the past year to speak about my concerns about the rapid 
growth of for-profit colleges. I believe some for-profit colleges are 
quality institutions, but I also believe many are taking advantage of 
Federal taxpayer dollars and doing more harm than good for unsuspecting 
students. In no area is this issue more important than when it comes to 
our veterans.
  A few years ago, I proudly joined Senator James Webb of Virginia, who 
said to me when he came to the Senate 5 years ago: I want to pass a new 
GI bill. It is my No. 1 priority. And he did it. Thank goodness, he 
did. This is a man--a veteran of the Vietnam conflict who served in the 
U.S. Marines and later as Secretary of the Navy--who knows what he is 
talking about when it comes to veterans. He helped put together the 
modern GI bill, and I am proud to have voted for it, as many of us did.
  When we passed that bill, we provided veterans with improved benefits 
to go to college. Veterans can receive up to $17,000 a year to cover 
the cost of tuition, fees, housing, and supplies at the college of 
their choice. Veterans can also access private schools through the 
Yellow Ribbon Program, which allows the VA to pay a portion of private 
school tuition under agreements with these schools.
  A lot of students are using the GI bill to attend for-profit colleges 
which are far more expensive than their public counterparts and even 
more expensive than many private not-for-profit universities. There is 
a rapid growth in veteran enrollment in these for-profit schools. For-
profit schools cost an average of $14,000 a year compared to $2,500 a 
year at public 2-year colleges and $7,000 at public 4-year 
universities.
  In the first year of the post-9/11 GI bill implementation, the 
Veterans' Administration spent $697 million on students attending 
public schools and $640 million on students attending for-profit 
schools--almost the same. But we educated far more students for our 
money in public schools--203,000 students at public schools compared to 
76,000 at for-profit schools, which charge two or three times as much 
for tuition and obviously educate one-half to one-third of what the 
public schools educated.
  The top five for-profit recipients of the post-9/11 dollars received 
over $320 million from the Department of Veterans Affairs last year: 
ITT received $79 million; Apollo, which is the University of Phoenix, 
$76.9 million; Education Management Corporation, $60.5 million; Career 
Education Corporation, $58.2 million; and DeVry, $47.9 million.
  There are reports of for-profit colleges aggressively targeting 
military servicemembers and veterans with expensive ad campaigns and 
hundreds of recruiters. One prominent for-profit college has 452 
recruiters focusing on recruiting veterans out of the military. Another 
employs 300. Why do they want these students? Because when they bring 
the students in under the GI bill, they get compensated at higher 
levels by the Federal Government. We have a limit that says that none 
of these for-profit schools can take more than 90 percent of their 
revenue out of the Federal Treasury. That is money that comes in 
through Pell grants and Federal college loans. When it comes to the GI 
bill, we raised the 90 percent. So these schools that argue: We are 
just in the private sector, just little businesses, get more than 90 
percent of their revenue from the Federal Government. They are the most 
heavily subsidized private businesses in America. It is time for us to 
ask, Are the taxpayers getting their money's worth? Are the veterans 
getting their money's worth?
  It is troublesome when these schools spend so much money on 
recruiting students instead of educating them. I am concerned. The 
current system allows for-profit colleges to earn millions of dollars 
from taxpayer-funded programs while providing a low-quality education 
to students. We need to put the brakes on for-profit colleges that are 
targeting veterans to reap profits from taxpayers' dollars.
  Last week, the Department of Veterans Affairs announced that it and 
the Texas Veterans Commission had disqualified three Texas campuses of 
Westwood College. They could no longer receive GI bill benefits. 
Westwood College is a for-profit college based out of Colorado, with 17 
locations in 6 States--several in Illinois.
  When I drive to O'Hare, I am on the Kennedy Expressway, and I look up 
and there is this office building and a big, huge sign, ``Westwood 
College.'' Wow, the campus of Westwood College.
  I know one of the students who went to Westwood College. This is a 
young lady who decided she needed to improve her life after high school 
and wanted to get into law enforcement. She enrolled at Westwood 
College to get a bachelor's degree in law enforcement. Five years 
later, they handed her a diploma at Westwood College. She went to the 
Chicago police department, and they said: We don't recognize that 
college; that is not a real college. All of the law enforcement in the 
region said to her: Westwood is not a real college; this is not a real 
diploma. She learned that to her disappointment, and she also learned 
to her disappointment that she had incurred $90,000 in college student 
loans for this worthless Westwood College diploma.
  Now the Veterans' Administration has disqualified three Westwood 
College campuses in Texas for their recruiting tactics when it comes to 
our veterans--a lesson learned and a word of warning. This action 
against Westwood was in response to findings of erroneous, deceptive, 
misleading advertising and enrollment practices at the Houston South, 
Dallas, and Fort Worth campuses.
  The Department of Veterans Affairs began its investigation after the 
GAO report on recruiting practices at for-profit colleges. They sent 
undercover applicants to 15 of these for-profit colleges. They found 
that all 15 made deceptive or otherwise questionable statements to 
potential applicants, including Westwood. Investigators found 
admissions representatives at Westwood misstating the cost of programs, 
failing to disclose graduation rates, and even suggesting that 
applicants falsify Federal financial aid forms.
  When asked about the cost of the program by the undercover 
investigator, the recruiter replied:

       It depends on the program. Usually a bachelor's program, 
     coming in with no college credits, this could be--it could 
     range from

[[Page 3996]]

     $50,000 to $75,000. Most schools, more traditional schools, 
     you're looking at about $100,000 to $150,000 to $200,000.

  That isn't true. To obtain the same degree from a public university 
in Texas would cost the student $36,000.
  Another financial aid counselor told a student with $250,000 in the 
bank that he should not report that money on his Federal financial aid 
forms, counter to Department of Education requirements.
  The Westwood representative said, ``Frankly, in my opinion, they 
don't need to know how much cash you have.''
  In December, the Texas Workforce Commission fined Westwood College 
$41,000 and put its Texas campuses on probation for the high-pressure 
recruiting practices that GAO discovered. And Westwood's online 
operation was put out of business in Texas for operating without a 
certificate of approval. Wisconsin has also banned Westwood from 
enrolling its students online.
  These are not the only problems that have arisen at Westwood College. 
Former recruiters have spoken out about the high-pressure sales tactics 
they were encouraged to use at Westwood. Recruiters talk about how they 
were given a script and told to make prospective students ``feel their 
pain.''
  Joshua Pruyn testified before the Senate HELP Committee as an 
admissions officer for Westwood College. He testified about how he was 
taught that enrolling a student was a psychological game.
  Recruiters told students that they could only be accepted into 
Westwood by interviewing with and securing a recommendation from an 
admissions representative. But in reality there was no standard for 
enrollment.
  Joshua testified:

       A student only needed a high school diploma or GED and $100 
     for the application fee. This fake interview would allow the 
     representative to ask students questions to uncover a 
     student's motivators and pain points--their hopes, fears, and 
     insecurities--all of which would later be used to pressure a 
     student to enroll.

  And I have heard from a number of former students of Westwood College 
in my State. They tell me of being lied to by recruiters and being 
buried under a mountain of debt for a degree that they are afraid will 
be worthless.
  Westwood College is accredited by a national accrediting agency. 
Because Westwood lacks regional accreditation, some employers such as 
the Illinois State Police will not consider graduates for employment.
  It also means that credits from Westwood College will not be accepted 
by most traditional public and non-profit colleges.
  Westwood admits this on its Web site, which states:

       Credits earned at Westwood College are typically not 
     transferable to other colleges or universities.

  How do they explain this to prospective students on the Web site?

       As a career-focused college, we offer a hands-on approach 
     to learning that's different--though, we believe, no less 
     valuable--than approaches students may experience at other 
     colleges and universities.

  But the real story is that traditional colleges do not view credits 
earned at Westwood as equivalent to their courses.
  Jason Longmore is a Navy veteran from Colorado who spent 6 months at 
Westwood College. His story was recently highlighted in a New York 
Times article. About his experience, Jason says ``I felt like I made a 
horrible, horrible decision.'' After 6 months, he left and had to 
repeat classes elsewhere because his Westwood credits wouldn't 
transfer.
  I have heard similar stories from my constituents. Bret, from 
Rockford, attended Westwood for a year and a half. He told me that his 
education was very low in quality and that his credits weren't accepted 
at any traditional schools. He says, ``I now have a mountain of debt 
and literally a degree that means absolutely nothing.''
  When I met with a former Westwood College student named Michelle in 
Chicago, she told me that Westwood repeatedly promised that regional 
accreditation was right around the corner.
  That never happened. Westwood College was pursuing accreditation from 
the Higher Learning Commission, a regional accrediting agency. The 
Higher Learning Commission declined to accredit Westwood and its 
application was withdrawn last November.
  And at least one Westwood campus is in trouble with its national 
accreditor as well.
  The Accrediting Commission of Career Schools and Colleges placed 
Westwood's Denver North campus on probation in September. The 
accreditor's notice states that Westwood ``has not demonstrated 
compliance with the Commission's requirements relative to student 
achievement outcomes'' and that it ``is gravely concerned about the 
recruiting activities of the system of Westwood affiliated 
institutions.''
  Many students who enroll at Westwood aren't sticking around long 
enough to graduate.
  The Senate HELP Committee made official information requests of 30 
for-profit companies, including the company that owns Westwood.
  According to that information, 2,500 students were enrolled as 
associate's degree students in 2008-2009. By September 2010, 57.6 
percent of those students had withdrawn from the school.
  One of the Westwood campuses in Illinois has a graduation rate of 
just 32 percent.
  The evidence suggests that Westwood may be more focused on enrolling 
students than supporting their academic success. I am glad to see the 
VA take action to address this issue.
  Congress gave the VA additional tools to do so at the end of our last 
session with the Post-9/11 GI Bill Improvements Act of 2010.
  The VA will soon have greater flexibility to act on its own to 
disapprove courses at schools that abuse student-veterans.
  We also gave the State approving agencies, which work hand-in-hand 
with the VA to monitor course quality, authority to disapprove courses 
provided at schools that fail to follow the rules, regardless of the 
State in which the school is located.
  These are important changes to VA's oversight authority at a time 
when distance learning takes on greater significance and for-profit 
schools are recruiting nationwide from call centers in various 
locations.
  I am glad that the VA has taken action to identify colleges like 
Westwood using abusive practices and end their participation in the VA 
education benefits program. But we have to do more for our veterans and 
all our students.
  I don't think Westwood will be the only college facing scrutiny under 
the G.I. bill program. I met with Secretary Shinseki this week and 
asked him to take more aggressive steps to identify colleges misusing 
the G.I. bill program. Veterans deserve to know that they have real 
support at their school and that their education will be meaningful 
when they are considering college or enrolled in college.
  I will continue to work with my colleagues, including Chairman Harkin 
and Senator Webb, to address this important issue.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Missouri.

                          ____________________