Search News


Browse Archives

News

Another Lender Relationship Questioned

May 7, 2007

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

Until now, the evolving controversy surrounding the federal student loan programs has focused mostly on the relationships between lenders and colleges and between lenders and federal officials. But now state guarantee agencies are being drawn into the fray, with Friday's announcements that Sen. Edward M. Kennedy and New Jersey's attorney general were investigating arrangements in which two lenders paid that state's student loan guarantor millions of dollars for loans that the agency helped direct the lenders' way.

Kennedy's office released documents Friday showing that the New Jersey Higher Education Student Assistance Authority, one of 23 state-based agencies that guarantee loans provided by private lenders in the Family Federal Education Loan Program and provide a range of other services to colleges and students, had arrangements with Sallie Mae and the National Education Loan Network in which it received a cut (1.4 percent and 1 percent, respectively) of the volume of each loan referred to the lenders by the state agency.

The agreements, which the state agency ended on April 20 as scrutiny of the arrangements grew, has since 2000 brought the state agency $2.2 million a year from Sallie Mae and a lesser amount from Nelnet, according to The Star-Ledger of Newark, which first reported on the arrangements last week.

Kennedy and officials in the New Jersey Attorney General's office said they would investigate whether the incentives paid to the state guarantor led it, or the colleges with which it works, to direct student borrowers to Sallie Mae and Nelnet rather than to other lenders from whom they might have received lower rates or better benefits.

The underlying implication of the entire student loan controversy to date has been that students are being hurt by being forced to pay more for their loans, although the lawmakers -- members of Congress and attorneys general in various states, notably New York -- have produced little evidence along those lines to date, focusing instead on revealing the relationships and questionable arrangements.

“The law established guaranty agencies to be impartial and unbiased guardians of student interests, overseeing the conduct of private lenders in the federally guaranteed loan program," Kennedy said in a news release Friday. "Contracts like these present a serious conflict of interest and compromise the agencies’ neutrality. We cannot allow guaranty agencies to become marketing departments for large for-profit lenders."

New Jersey's first assistant attorney general, Anne Milgram, who is heading the state's investigation, told the Star-Ledger that her office was looking into whether the state guarantor "offered inappropriate inducements or sought to inappropriately influence schools to provide specific loans and to work in conjunction with HESAA." (New Jersey's attorney general announced Friday that it would undertake a broad review, including subpoenas to 60-odd colleges, into lender-college relationships, prompted by Kennedy's inquiry and that of Andrew M. Cuomo, the attorney general in neighboring New York.)

Officials at some New Jersey colleges told that the newspaper they had felt pressure from the state agency, first to participate in the FFEL program (also known as the guaranteed loan program) rather than the government's competing direct loan program, and to send their students to Sallie Mae.

"All the public institutions were proactively encouraged to get into the (FFELP) and use Sallie Mae as the preferred lender," Anne Frechette, a spokeswoman for Montclair State University, told The Star-Ledger.

David Muha, a spokesman for Drew University, said in an interview Sunday that the state agency had approached his institution in 2000 about participating in a pilot program in which loans handled through Sallie Mae would receive expedited processing and would be handled by a single loan officer, ensuring better customer service. In addition, HESAA promised to put one of its own officials in Drew's financial aid office to help process loans. The promise of top-quality customer service sold Drew officials, Muha said; no mention was made, then or since, about the fact that the agency would receive funds for loans that went Sallie Mae's way.

"From our perspective, it was all about the service," Muha said. "Drew had no knowledge that there was any kind of backend agreement going on, and there was really no reason for Drew or any other university to question the motives of a state agency set up to serve students going to school in New Jersey."

For the last seven years, until last fall, when a new financial aid officer took over, the HESAA loan program was alone on Drew's preferred lender list, a practice that has become increasingly frowned on in the current climate of increased scrutiny of lender-college relationships. Last fall, the institution added two other firms, both of which have their loans processed by Sallie Mae, Muha said.

Data provided by Studentmarket Measure, which collects information on the student loan programs, suggests that Sallie Mae has become the dominant lender -- in some cases, virtually the sole lender -- at numerous public and private colleges in New Jersey, as seen in the table below:

Proportion of Loan Volume Originated by Sallie Mae at Selected N.J. Colleges

Institution Sallie Mae Loan Volume Total Loan Volume Sallie Mae %
of Total Loan Volume
Montclair State U. $67,352,915 $67,371,841 100%
Dover Business College 1,640,875 1,640,875 100
Somerset Christian College 181,383 181,383 100
Thomas A. Edison State College 6,073,096 6,101,591 99.5
William Paterson U. of NJ 8,275,381 8,380,831 98.7
College of New Jersey 20,839,922 21,142,555 98.6
Rutgers U. - Newark Campus 906,641 926,641 97.8
Seton Hall U. 59,312,242 60,735,942 97.7

Source: Studentmarket Measure

Officials at New Jersey's Higher Education Student Assistance Authority could not be reached for comment Friday or over the weekend. But its executive director, E. Michael Angulo, told The Star-Ledger that the agency will cooperate with Rabner's probe. "Our immediate objective is to develop 'best practices' guidelines that reflect the highest ethical standards and codes of conduct in the industry." (On a side note: the agency's chief financial officer, Gene Hutchins, was a member of the Education Department committee that has been negotiating possible changes in federal regulations governing the student loan programs. Among the topics that panel has been discussing are the sorts of inducements that are at issue here.)

A spokesman for Sallie Mae, Tom Joyce, said via e-mail on Sunday that its agreement with the New Jersey agency had gone through normal state procurement procedures, and noted that the arrangement was "non-exclusive.... The agency was free to work with other lenders, and did so." Colleges in New Jersey, and their students, Joyce said, "were also free to work with any lenders they chose."

He also said it was Sallie Mae's understanding that "the agency used the proceeds to help defray the 1 percent federal default fee charged to students by the federal government," adding: "Simply put, the result of this agreement was that student loans cost less for New Jersey's college students."

Joyce said, in response to a reporter's question, that Sallie Mae has not had any similar arrangements with other state guarantors.

Also on Friday, U.S. Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.), who along with Cuomo and Kennedy has been the leading the three-ring investigation into the loan industry, announced Friday that the U.S. Education Department's inspector general had begun an investigation into allegations that department officials who oversee the loan programs may have had conflicts of interest because of their relationships with lenders. Miller had requested such an investigation last month.

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on Another Lender Relationship Questioned

  • oh no -- even guarantors?
  • Posted by finaidfollies on May 7, 2007 at 7:50am EDT
  • Shocking news: even guarantors, the keepers of all things wholesome and nice in student loans, have sunk into the morass.

    The argument that whatever money went to reducing the guarantee fee is bogus. If there was a sweetheart deal between SLMA and the NJ agency, and students got a reduction, perhaps the most that could be said of the NJ agency is that they stayed bought.

    The result of staying bought is to restrain competition. It looks like the schools fell in line with this arrangement(although, in fairness, FFEL schools everywhere get a lot of pressure to work with state agencies).

    There are tons of guarantors out there who routinely waive the guarantee fee. NJ could have permitted a level playing field, and let the FFEL players compete for the business. If instead the guarantor was locked in to maximize volume with a single loan provider, this usually doesn't encourage benevolent cost-cutting.

  • Posted by Bob on May 7, 2007 at 8:45am EDT
  • Well, this "unholy alliance" has finally been exposed to scrutiny by folks outside of the Financial Aid Industry. Folks in the industry have expressed doubt at this arrangement for some time.

    It puts Sallie Mae's offer to take over PHEAA/AES, the nations largest nonprofit guarantee agency, in a whole new light. Of course, that is small consolation NOW THAT PHEAA has been raked over the coals by Sallie Mae's backers in Pennsylvania.

    Mr. Rendell, I hope you open your eyes and realize how good you have it in PA.

  • No surprise
  • Posted by Jersey Guy on May 7, 2007 at 10:55am EDT
  • To those of us here in New Jersey, where corruption in government agencies is generally accepted as the normal way business is done, this is maddening, but hardly surprising. And considering that some colleges got public brow-beatings from Andrew Cuomo over $10 thousand or so worth of "revenue sharing" (or "kickbacks," depending on your perspective), what should NJHESAA get for $15 million worth?

    And if this is happening in a state with only about 60 colleges, the by-far largest of which is in Direct Lending, it's not a stretch to assume that it's been going on elsewhere too.

    It was only a matter of time before the role guarantors played in all of this was brought to light. 61 colleges in NJ are now dealing with subpoenas - and a guilty verdict in teh court of public opinion - because of a backroom kickback deal made by leaders of a government agency. The FFELP program is too full of ways for government and big business to get way too cozy. Changes need to be made, and people who have created this mess need to be removed.

  • Abolish the entire financial aid enterprise
  • Posted by Chris Rasmussen on May 7, 2007 at 11:15am EDT
  • Here's a radical idea: to root out all of the corruption that's clearly endemic in the student lending enterprise, how about doing away with it entirely? Institutions would charge a flat fee that accurately reflects their costs. Students would be eligible for low-interest loans through the federal Direct Lending program up to the full cost of attendance, which would be repayable upon graduation or other departure on an income-contingent basis. There would be no needs analysis, thereby making the FAFSA unnecessary. The Pell grant program would cease to exist, its current budget being used to further reduce the interest rate on Direct Loans.

    This would pretty much obviate the need for institutional financial aid offices across the nation, save for small operations of a handful of people to advise students on administrative processes related to Direct Lending and perhaps to assist them in locating employment opportunities (and awarding scholarships). The savings from a reduction in institutional personnel could be applied to tuition reduction. The entire student loan industry would essentially cease to exist....

  • Posted by Gimme A. Break on May 7, 2007 at 6:30pm EDT
  • This is just so much political BS. The students don't lose a penny by this. But, Kennedy et al get a lot of free sensational publicity. Remember, the ultimate goal of any politician is to get re-elected. This is Kennedy's goal first and foremost. Of course, he also feels that anything can be done better if the Government does it. If the FFELP program is flawed, the flaws are established by the regulations that the lenders and holders have to abide by, not by the practices of the participants in the program.

  • Turn the tables
  • Posted by djm1657 on May 8, 2007 at 5:55pm EDT
  • Lets start questioning how we are running the FDSLP for a moment. The program is billions in debt. High default rates. And last but surely not least, do you think the federal workers at the DOE in the fdslp area are working for free? Let us not forget that not only are they making a great income working for the feds but they do NOT pay any FICA tax. However, they reap the benefits of FICA that you and I pay for. The problem here is that our honest government is putting all of the information out there for all of us to know exactly what the bottom line is for fdslp. Yep that is right. Our honest politicians are giving us full disclosure.

    Well that would be a real miracle.

    Let us look at how many relationships our politicians have in place that have monetary benefits for them. Why is it okay for Kennedy to offer to pay schools to go into DL but it isn't okay to have a lender offer rev share (which by the way is used for students)? Why is it okay for our own government to out source to other countries yet we as schools cannot out source to a lender partner that in no way leads the student to apply for a loan with one lender over another. It is no different than out sourcing and is actually employing Americans and not over seas. Look up any school that uses a call center from Sallie Mae or Nelnet and just try and get the person to recommend a lender. Go ahead and try it. We use test callers from time to time to see what they will say and have done it for all 3 years we have used one of them and not one time do they stray from the script we gave them. Did you know that our government out sources to other countries? Yep they do. Also we have to pay for this service for the call center; it is not free. However we are employing people here and not India. Therefore paying good ole American taxes. Lets turn the tables and get some guts to start questioning full disclosure of all programs and not just ffelp.

  • I CAN - BUT - YOU CAN'T
  • Posted by Grrrrrrrr on May 8, 2007 at 10:00pm EDT
  • Okay, why can the government accept money from lenders but schools cannot? The government charges lenders huge premiums to be in the ffelp program and Cuomo charges lenders $2 Million + to sign his code of conduct. Hum, must be you have to be in government to be able to accept a payment from a lender. The government can charge default fees to students but if the lender does then the school is not looking out for the student by using a lender charging fees. This is so confusing and such a double standard that well, it is politics at its best I guess.