Search News


Browse Archives

News

While Public Colleges Feel Pain, For-Profits See Gains

December 10, 2008

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

WASHINGTON -- State support of public colleges is shrinking.

Endowment values are plummeting.

Tuition is increasing, and threatening college affordability.

Sounds pretty bleak, right? Not if you run a for-profit college.

“In my opinion, all of that is good news for career colleges,” Rene Champagne, chairman of the Career College Association, told fellow leaders of for-profit colleges at a conference here Tuesday.

Tuesday morning’s sessions of the CCA’s Annual Higher Education Investment Conference focused on the growing profitability and market share of for-profit colleges. While Champagne was quick to say he didn’t wish public colleges any ill will, there is little denying that some of the worst economic conditions for public colleges have historically proven fertile ground for the growth of the for-profit sector, according to data presented at the conference.

For-profit colleges have seen enrollment grow by an average of about 17 percent during the past nine economic downturns -- when Gross Domestic Product declined and unemployment rose -- compared with an average of 8 percent growth during positive economic conditions, according to an analysis provided by Stifel Nicolaus, a brokerage and investment banking firm.

The current economic downturn appears to be having a similarly positive effect on for-profit institutions’ enrollments. Between July and September of 2008, nine publicly traded for-profit colleges saw average enrollment growth of 14.8 percent, about 2 percentage points higher than the last four quarters, Stifel Nicolaus found.

As would be expected, publicly traded for-profit colleges saw revenues increase as well, generating $10 billion in the fall of 2008, an increase of 13 percent over last year, Stifel Nicolaus found.

The dramatic spike in unemployment in the U.S. also has a silver lining for for-profit institutions.

“Students are less likely to drop out because there are no jobs to go to or few jobs to go to,” said Champagne, former chairman and chief executive officer of ITT Educational Services, Inc., which operates more than 100 for-profit technical institutes.

Career Colleges See Role in Jobs Push

Leaders of for-profit colleges also see opportunity in the promises of President-Elect Barack Obama, who is calling for the creation of 2.5 million jobs by 2011. Daniel Hamburger, president and CEO of Devry Inc., said he has met with Obama’s transition team for education and has noted an “increased awareness” that the for-profit sector -- Hamburger calls it the “market-funded” sector -- has a critical role to play in job creation.

“I am more optimistic today than I have ever been,” he said.

Devry announced this week that it saw undergraduate enrollment grow to more than 15,800 this fall, an increase of 19.7 percent from the previous year.

Despite the optimism in the for-profit sector, Hamburger’s rejection of the “for-profit” label indicates continuing concerns about the way such colleges are sometimes portrayed. Lawmakers and leaders in nonprofit higher education have historically viewed the sector with skepticism, questioning the quality of the education provided and citing lingering concerns that the worst of career-oriented institutions take advantage of low-income students.

But Hamburger said he sees that skepticism fading, particularly because there’s greater recognition that for-profit colleges will have a role to play in stabilizing the economy.

“Take all this other stuff and strip it away,” he said, “and it’s about jobs.”

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on While Public Colleges Feel Pain, For-Profits See Gains

  • Good fit for Veterans
  • Posted by Randy Plunkett , National Director of Military Affairs at DeVry University on December 10, 2008 at 6:30am EST
  • Market-driven education has always been very popular with veterans and military students. Most people hear that 2 million GIs used the GI Bill to attend public and private colleges and universities after WWII. Rarely does one read that almost 5 million used the Bill for apprenticeships, on the job training, vocational training, and market-driven education.

    This trend continues; when one examines the institutions that receive the most money from the VA, the majority are market-driven schools. Of the top 11, 7 are for-profit institutions. This trend is likely to continue, as our focus is to get people to work. Therefore, market-driven educational institutions continually strive to be relevant and appealing to industry. Their survival depends on it, and their success is evident.

  • For Profit Colleges - Drawing them in with online courses?
  • Posted by Michael Ritter on December 10, 2008 at 7:10am EST
  • I'm wondering how many for profit colleges have active online programs and if that is driving some of the increase in enrollment. Many public institutions have yet to "get it" when it comes to providing online education.

  • For-profit schools offer messages of convenience and flexibility
  • Posted by Heather Teague , Education Marketing Consultant on December 10, 2008 at 9:25am EST
  • I completely agree with Mr. Ritter's comment regarding the availability of online courses on the for-profit side. In many cases, "for-profit" schools cater to the working adult returning to the classroom. I have marketed several online degree programs and the CORE message is similar: convenient, flexible, and perfect for busy adults.

  • While Public Colleges Feel Pain, For-Profits See Gains’
  • Posted by Greg Garcia , Acadmeic Dean Military Programs at Grantham University on December 10, 2008 at 1:00pm EST
  • Champagne, Plunkett and Teague have it right. It is about jobs, or more specifically, about the road to getting and keeping a good job. The For-Profits and onliners have clearly outdistanced the brick and mortar folks when it comes to efficiency and effectiveness in higher education access and egress and the amount of time spent between the two.

  • "Market-funded” sector?
  • Posted by Bill Barrett , Executive Director at AICAD on December 10, 2008 at 1:15pm EST
  • This phrase - “market-funded” sector - is an clever slight of hand. The for-profit sector is funded largely by student tuition and federal student aid. The "market" does not send money to the students, since these colleges award little or no institutional aid. Indeed, the flow of money is the reverse. Student and government funds flow to the investors in the form of profit - in the case of one for-profit chain I know that profit was $2400 per student. And that $2400 came from the pockets of students and from your and my tax dollars.

  • Posted by Nikki on December 10, 2008 at 3:35pm EST
  • I have worked for both a non-profit school and a for profit school, in the econoically challenged state of Michigan, and the for profit school clearly did a better job of attracting students who are returning to school with the online classes and evening classes. A 48 year old who has been working for 30 years does not want to sit next to a 20 something!!!

  • Resource Allocation
  • Posted by Bob Barker , President at Barker Educational Services on December 10, 2008 at 9:55pm EST
  • After 20 years of working at the University of Phoenix, I started two companies that work with a variety of for profit and not for profit colleges. Emperically, I can share that there really is no difference in the resistance levels in terms of candidate enrollments. To this end, the lead conversion levels are quite similair. The major difference is that you rarely see a traditional college allocate 10+% of their tuition revenues towards advertising and candidate lead generation. You also don't see traditional staffing levels like you see at a for profit. For profit colleges typically are more heavily weighted in their enrollment departments. On the other hand, traditional non profits are more heavily weighted towards faculty and non enrollment administrative positions.

    Arizona State University has outsourced its enrollment processes for its online programs. In time, I am very certain that they will do quite well. I am even more certain that you will see more state colleges and other non profits partner with for profit outsource service companies in the future. These partnerships could be very diusruptive to the market dominance the for profits currently enjoy in the online enrollment battlefield.

  • Posted by David D. Branigan, Ed.D. , Professor on December 11, 2008 at 11:35am EST
  • One wonders if the open enrollment policies of most career-oriented universities might have something to do with their success. Traditional public and private universities tend to reserve their educational opportunties for what one might call the educational elite and cast away those who do not meet thier qualifications. Career-oriented universities have programs to help raise those "castaways" to the level where they can achieve their educational and career goals.

  • Posted by Daniel Hamburger , President and Chief Executive Officer at DeVry Inc. on December 11, 2008 at 8:10pm EST
  • I am writing in regard to your article, where reference was made to my use of the term "market-funded" rather than "for-profit." The reason I reject the labeling of schools as either "for-profit" or "non-profit" is that all schools must have revenues in excess of their costs to be economically sustainable.

    So the question is not "are you profitable?" but "how are you funded?" I propose using the labels of 1) government-funded (e.g., University of Michigan); 2) privately-funded (e.g., Princeton University); and 3) market-funded (e.g., DeVry University). Market-funded colleges and universities present a sustainable market solution that directly addresses our workforce development needs. In a time of economic crisis, strained government budgets and shortages of trained professionals, our society is fortunate to have a viable option for educating more students without adding to the national debt.

  • Euphemisms
  • Posted by RH and MA at Institute for Alternative Economics on April 6, 2009 at 10:45am EDT
  • Mr. Hamburger,

    Nevertheless, the term "market funded" is what linguists call a euphemism, a more neutral term for what has become a pejorative term: "for-profit," due to its undeniable dark side. (But "market-funded" in time may also need revision.)It glosses over the fact that there are owners, and then there are OWNERS who must narrow down education (be opportunistic) in order to maximize Return on Investment. In your circles I'm sure that it is perfectly rationalizable (in the ego-defensive sense.) But your "circles" do not, rather, should not, run the world exclusively.

    Such narrowing could be considered dubious for any number of reasons. For one thing, there is concern that the for-profit sector, while opportunistically
    providing "opportunity" to certain "under served" populations, only further reinforces the very system that "under serves" such citizens through a narrowed down education. That is, it arguably "indoctrinates" citizens that there can be no better alternative economy than market competition.

    If you yourself cannot see how that could be possible without succumbing to Soviet- or Cuban- or Chinese- or North Korean-style Communism, then your own talent for philosophy and political economy may also be too narrowly developed, especially if you believe the "market" is the be all and end all of civilization. I respect that belief. But then is it education or job training that you're business provides? As long as we are parsing terms.

    I offer this respectfully in the interest of philosophical exchange.