| • FORM 10-Q • FIRST AMENDMENT OF ESI PENSION PLAN • SECTION 302 CEO CERTIFICATION • SECTION 302 CFO CERTIFICATION • SECTION 906 CEO CERTIFICATION • SECTION 906 CFO CERTIFICATION • XBRL INSTANCE DOCUMENT • XBRL TAXONOMY EXTENSION SCHEMA • XBRL TAXONOMY EXTENSION CALCULATION LINKBASE • XBRL TAXONOMY EXTENSION DEFINITION LINKBASE • XBRL TAXONOMY EXTENSION LABEL LINKBASE • XBRL TAXONOMY EXTENSION PRESENTATION LINKBASE | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Table of Contents
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-Q
(Mark One)
For the quarterly period ended June 30, 2012 OR
For the transition period from to Commission file number 1-13144
ITT EDUCATIONAL SERVICES, INC. (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (317) 706-9200
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes x No ¨ Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes x No ¨ Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes ¨ No x 23,319,140 Number of shares of Common Stock, $.01 par value, outstanding at June 30, 2012
Table of ContentsITT EDUCATIONAL SERVICES, INC. Carmel, Indiana Quarterly Report to Securities and Exchange Commission June 30, 2012 PART I FINANCIAL INFORMATION Item 1. Financial Statements.
- 1 -
Table of ContentsITT EDUCATIONAL SERVICES, INC. CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS (Dollars in thousands, except per share data)
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated financial statements.
- 2 -
Table of ContentsITT EDUCATIONAL SERVICES, INC. CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME (Amounts in thousands, except per share data) (unaudited)
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated financial statements.
- 3 -
Table of ContentsITT EDUCATIONAL SERVICES, INC. CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (Dollars in thousands) (unaudited)
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated financial statements.
- 4 -
Table of ContentsITT EDUCATIONAL SERVICES, INC. CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS (Dollars in thousands) (unaudited)
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated financial statements.
- 5 -
Table of ContentsITT EDUCATIONAL SERVICES, INC. CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY (Dollars and shares in thousands)
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated financial statements.
- 6 -
Table of ContentsITT EDUCATIONAL SERVICES, INC. NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS June 30, 2012 (Dollars in thousands, except per share data and unless otherwise stated) 1. The Company and Basis of Presentation We are a leading proprietary provider of postsecondary degree programs in the United States based on revenue and student enrollment. As of June 30, 2012, we were offering master, bachelor and associate degree programs to approximately 66,000 students at ITT Technical Institute and Daniel Webster College locations. In addition, we offered one or more of our online programs to students who are located in 48 states. As of June 30, 2012, we had 149 college locations (including 146 campuses and three learning sites) in 39 states. All of our college locations are authorized by the applicable education authorities of the states in which they operate and are accredited by an accrediting commission recognized by the U.S. Department of Education (“ED”). We have provided career-oriented education programs since 1969 under the “ITT Technical Institute” name and since June 2009 under the “Daniel Webster College” name. Our corporate headquarters are located in Carmel, Indiana. The accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements include our wholly-owned subsidiaries’ accounts and have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States of America for interim periods and pursuant to the rules and regulations of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). Certain information and footnote disclosures, including significant accounting policies, normally included in a complete presentation of financial statements prepared in accordance with those principles, rules and regulations have been omitted. The Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet as of December 31, 2011 was derived from audited financial statements but, as presented in this report, may not include all disclosures required by accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. Arrangements where we may have a variable interest in another party are evaluated in accordance with the provisions of Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC” or “Codification”) 810, “Consolidation” (“ASC 810”), to determine whether we would be required to include the financial results of the other party in our consolidated financial statements. Based on our most recent evaluation, we were not required to include the financial results of any variable interest entity in our condensed consolidated financial statements. See Note 8 – Variable Interests, for additional discussion of our variable interests. In the opinion of our management, the financial statements contain all adjustments necessary to fairly state our financial condition and results of operations. The interim financial information should be read in conjunction with the audited consolidated financial statements and notes thereto contained in our Annual Report on Form 10-K as filed with the SEC for the year ended December 31, 2011. 2. New Accounting Guidance In December 2011, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) No. 2011-12, which is included in the Codification under ASC 220, “Comprehensive Income” (“ASC 220”). This update defers the effective date of ASU No. 2011-05 for changes that relate to the presentation of reclassification adjustments out of accumulated other comprehensive income. None of the other requirements in ASU 2011-05 are affected by this update. This guidance became effective for our interim and annual reporting periods beginning January 1, 2012. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on our condensed consolidated financial statements. Also in December 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-11, which is included in the Codification under ASC 210, “Balance Sheet” (“ASC 210”). This update provides for enhanced disclosures to help users of financial statements evaluate the effect or potential effect of netting arrangements on an entity’s financial position. This guidance is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning January 1, 2013. We have not yet determined the effect that the adoption of this guidance will have on our condensed consolidated financial statements. In September 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-08, which is included in the Codification under ASC 350, “Intangibles – Goodwill and Other” (“ASC 350”). This update allows an entity to assess qualitative factors to determine whether it is necessary to perform the two-step quantitative goodwill impairment test. This guidance became effective for our interim and annual reporting periods beginning January 1, 2012. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on our condensed consolidated financial statements. In June 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-05, which is included in the Codification under ASC 220. This update requires total comprehensive income, the components of net income and the components of other comprehensive income to be presented either in a single continuous statement or in two separate but consecutive statements. This guidance became effective for our interim and annual reporting periods beginning January 1, 2012. Prior to January 1, 2012, we presented total Comprehensive income and the components of Other comprehensive income in our Condensed Consolidated Statements of Shareholders’ Equity. After December 31, 2011, we present total Comprehensive income and the components of Other comprehensive income in our Condensed Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income. In May 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-04, which is included in the Codification under ASC 820, “Fair Value Measurements” (“ASC 820”). This update provides guidance and clarification about the application of existing fair value measurements and disclosure requirements. This guidance became effective for our interim and annual reporting periods beginning January 1, 2012. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on our condensed consolidated financial statements.
- 7 -
Table of Contents3. Fair Value Fair value for financial reporting is defined as the price that would be received upon the sale of an asset or paid upon the transfer of a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. The fair value measurement of our financial assets recorded on our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets utilized assumptions categorized as observable inputs under the accounting guidance. Observable inputs are assumptions based on independent market data sources. The following table sets forth information regarding the fair value measurement of our financial assets as of June 30, 2012:
We used quoted prices in active markets for identical assets as of the measurement date to value our financial assets that were categorized as Level 1. The carrying amounts for cash and cash equivalents, restricted cash, accounts receivable, accounts payable, other current liabilities and deferred revenue approximate fair value, because of the immediate or short-term maturity of these financial instruments. As of June 30, 2012, each of the carrying value and the estimated fair value of the notes receivable included in Other assets on our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet was approximately $19,000. We estimated the fair value of the notes receivable by discounting the future cash flows using current rates for similar arrangements. The assumptions used in this estimate are considered unobservable inputs. Fair value measurements that utilize significant unobservable inputs are categorized as Level 3 measurements under the accounting guidance. As of June 30, 2012, each of the carrying value and the estimated fair value of our long-term debt was approximately $150,000. The fair value of our long-term debt was estimated by discounting the future cash flows using current rates for similar loans with similar characteristics and remaining maturities. We utilized inputs that were observable or were principally derived from observable market data to estimate the fair value of our long-term debt. Fair value measurements that utilize significant other observable inputs are categorized as Level 2 measurements under the accounting guidance. 4. Equity Compensation The stock-based compensation expense and related income tax benefit recognized in our Condensed Consolidated Statements of Income in the periods indicated were as follows:
We did not capitalize any stock-based compensation cost in the three or six months ended June 30, 2012 or 2011. As of June 30, 2012, we estimated that pre-tax compensation expense for unvested stock-based compensation grants in the amount of approximately $30,300, net of estimated forfeitures, will be recognized in future periods. This expense will be recognized over the remaining service period applicable to the grantees which, on a weighted-average basis, is approximately 2.3 years.
- 8 -
Table of ContentsThe stock options granted, forfeited, exercised and expired in the period indicated were as follows:
The following table sets forth information regarding the stock options granted and exercised in the periods indicated:
The intrinsic value of a stock option is the difference between the fair market value of the stock and the option exercise price. The fair value of each stock option grant was estimated on the date of grant using the following assumptions:
The following table sets forth the number of restricted stock units (“RSUs”) that were granted, forfeited and vested in the period indicated:
In the six months ended June 30, 2012:
- 9 -
Table of Contents5. Stock Repurchases As of June 30, 2012, approximately 7.8 million shares remained available for repurchase under the share repurchase program (the “Repurchase Program”) authorized by our Board of Directors. The terms of the Repurchase Program provide that we may repurchase shares of our common stock, from time to time depending on market conditions and other considerations, in the open market or through privately negotiated transactions in accordance with Rule 10b-18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). Unless earlier terminated by our Board of Directors, the Repurchase Program will expire when we repurchase all shares authorized for repurchase thereunder. The following table sets forth information regarding the shares of our common stock that we repurchased in the periods indicated:
6. Debt We were a party to a Second Amended and Restated Credit Agreement dated as of January 11, 2010, as amended (the “Prior Credit Agreement”), to borrow up to $150,000 under two revolving credit facilities: one in the maximum principal amount of $50,000; and the other in the maximum principal amount of $100,000. The borrowings under each credit facility could have been secured or unsecured at our election, provided that we had not defaulted under the Prior Credit Agreement. Borrowings under the Prior Credit Agreement bore interest, at our option, at the London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) plus an applicable margin or at an alternative base rate, as defined under the Prior Credit Agreement. We paid a facility fee equal to 0.25% per annum on the daily amount of the commitment (whether used or unused) under the Prior Credit Agreement. On March 21, 2012, we entered into a credit agreement (the “New Credit Agreement”) that provides for a $325,000 senior revolving credit facility (the “Revolver”). The New Credit Agreement also provides that we may seek additional revolving commitments or term loan commitments in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $125,000. The lenders under the New Credit Agreement are not under any obligation to provide any such additional revolving commitments or term loan commitments. The New Credit Agreement has a maturity date of March 21, 2015. A portion of the borrowings under the Revolver were used to prepay the entire outstanding indebtedness under the Prior Credit Agreement. The Prior Credit Agreement was also terminated on March 21, 2012. In addition to the prepayment of the outstanding indebtedness under the Prior Credit Agreement, borrowings under the New Credit Agreement will be used for general corporate purposes. Borrowings under the New Credit Agreement bear interest, at our option, at LIBOR plus an applicable margin or at an alternative base rate, as defined under the New Credit Agreement, plus an applicable margin. The applicable margin for borrowings under the Revolver is determined based on the ratio of our total Indebtedness (as defined in the New Credit Agreement) to EBITDA (as defined in the New Credit Agreement) (the “Leverage Ratio”) as of the end of each fiscal quarter. We also pay a commitment fee on the amount of the unutilized commitments under the New Credit Agreement. The amount of the commitment fee is determined based on the Leverage Ratio as of the end of each fiscal quarter. The New Credit Agreement contains, among other things, covenants, representations and warranties and events of default customary for credit facilities. The New Credit Agreement is secured by a pledge of the equity interests of our subsidiaries and is guaranteed by one of our subsidiaries. We are required to maintain compliance with a maximum Leverage Ratio, a minimum interest coverage ratio, a minimum liquidity amount and several ratios related to the ED’s regulations. We were in compliance with those requirements as of June 30, 2012. As of June 30, 2012, the borrowings under the New Credit Agreement totaled $150,000 and bore interest at a weighted average rate of 2.25% per annum. The effective interest rate on our borrowings was approximately 2.70% per annum in the three months ended June 30, 2012 and approximately 1.30% per annum in the three months ended June 30, 2011. In the six months ended June 30, 2012, the effective interest rate on our borrowings was approximately 2.10% per annum compared to approximately 1.40% per annum in the six months ended June 30, 2011. The commitment fee under the New Credit Agreement was 0.30% as of June 30, 2012.
- 10 -
Table of ContentsThe following table sets forth the interest expense (including the facility fee and commitment fee) that we recognized on our borrowings under the New Credit Agreement and under the Prior Credit Agreement in the periods indicated:
7. Investments Our available-for-sale investments were classified as short-term investments on our June 30, 2012, December 31, 2011 and June 30, 2011 Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. The following table sets forth the aggregate fair value, amortized cost basis and the net unrealized gains and losses included in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) of our available-for-sale investments as of the dates indicated:
The following table sets forth the unrealized gains and losses on available-for-sale investments that were included in other comprehensive income (loss) in the periods indicated:
The following table sets forth the components of investment income included in Interest income in our Condensed Consolidated Statements of Income in the periods indicated:
8. Variable Interests On January 20, 2010, we entered into agreements with unrelated third parties to establish the PEAKS Private Student Loan Program (“PEAKS Program”), which is a private education loan program for our students. Under the PEAKS Program, an unaffiliated lender originated private education loans to our eligible students and, subsequently, sold those loans to an unaffiliated trust that purchased, owns and collects private education loans (“PEAKS Trust”). The PEAKS Trust issued senior debt in the aggregate principal amount of $300,000 (“PEAKS Senior Debt”) to investors. The lender disbursed the proceeds of the private education loans to us for application to the students’ account balances with us that represented their unpaid education costs. We transferred a portion of the amount of each private education loan disbursed to us under the PEAKS Program to the PEAKS Trust in exchange for a subordinated note issued by the PEAKS Trust (“Subordinated Note”). No new private education loans were or will be originated under the PEAKS Program after July 2011, but immaterial amounts related to loans originated prior to that date were disbursed by the lender through March 2012. The Subordinated Note is non-interest bearing and has been recorded net of an unamortized discount based on an imputed interest rate of 9.0% in Other assets on our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. The discount is amortized and recognized in Interest income in our Condensed Consolidated Statements of Income over the term of the Subordinated Note. The maturity date of the Subordinated Note is in March 2026. The face value of the Subordinated Note as of June 30, 2012 was approximately $73,700.
- 11 -
Table of ContentsThe PEAKS Trust utilized the proceeds from the issuance of the PEAKS Senior Debt and the Subordinated Note to purchase the private education loans made by the lender to our students. The assets of the PEAKS Trust (which include, among other assets, the private education loans owned by the PEAKS Trust) serve as collateral for, and are intended to be the principal source of, the repayment of the PEAKS Senior Debt and the Subordinated Note. The PEAKS Trust is required to maintain assets having an aggregate value that exceeds the outstanding balance of the PEAKS Senior Debt. As of June 30, 2012, the value of the assets of the PEAKS Trust satisfied this requirement. We guarantee payment of the principal, interest and certain call premiums owed on the PEAKS Senior Debt, and the administrative fees and expenses of the PEAKS Trust (“PEAKS Guarantee”). See Note 11 – Contingencies, for further discussion of the PEAKS Guarantee. We did not explicitly or implicitly provide any financial or other support to the PEAKS Trust during the three or six months ended June 30, 2012 or 2011 that we were not contractually required to provide, and we do not intend to provide any such support to the PEAKS Trust in the foreseeable future, other than what we are contractually required to provide. The PEAKS Trust is a variable interest entity as defined under ASC 810. We held variable interests in the PEAKS Trust as of June 30, 2012 as a result of the Subordinated Note and PEAKS Guarantee. To determine whether we were the primary beneficiary of the PEAKS Trust, we:
We determined that the activities of the PEAKS Trust that most significantly impact the economic performance of the PEAKS Trust involve:
To make that determination, we analyzed various possible scenarios of student loan portfolio performance to evaluate the potential economic impact on the PEAKS Trust. In our analysis, we made what we believe are conservative assumptions based on historical data for the following key variables:
Based on our analysis, we concluded that we are not the primary beneficiary of the PEAKS Trust, because we do not have the power to direct the activities that most significantly impact the economic performance of the PEAKS Trust. As a result, we are not required under ASC 810 to include the financial results of the PEAKS Trust in our condensed consolidated financial statements for the three or six months ended June 30, 2012. Our conclusion that we are not the primary beneficiary of the PEAKS Trust did not change from the prior reporting period. Therefore, there was no effect on our condensed consolidated financial statements. On February 20, 2009, we entered into agreements with an unaffiliated entity (the “2009 Entity”) to create a program that makes private education loans available to our students to help pay the students’ cost of education that student financial aid from federal, state and other sources do not cover (the “2009 Loan Program”). Under the 2009 Loan Program, an unaffiliated lender originated private education loans to our eligible students and, subsequently, sold those loans to the 2009 Entity. The 2009 Entity purchased the private education loans from the lender utilizing funds received from its owners in exchange for participation interests in the private education loans acquired by the 2009 Entity. The lender disbursed the proceeds of the private education loans to us for application to the students’ account balances with us that represent their unpaid education costs. No new private education loans were or will be originated under the 2009 Loan Program after December 31, 2011, but immaterial amounts related to loans originated prior to that date were disbursed by the lender through June 2012. In connection with the 2009 Loan Program, we entered into a risk sharing agreement (the “2009 RSA”) with the 2009 Entity. Under the 2009 RSA, we guarantee the repayment of any private education loans that are charged off above a certain percentage of the private education loans made under the 2009 Loan Program, based on the annual dollar volume. See Note 11 – Contingencies, for further discussion of the 2009 RSA.
- 12 -
Table of ContentsIn addition, we have made advances to the 2009 Entity under a revolving promissory note (the “Revolving Note”). We did not make any advances in the three and six months ended June 30, 2012 to the 2009 Entity under the Revolving Note that we were not contractually required to make. In the three and six months ended June 30, 2011, we made advances of $200 to the 2009 Entity under the Revolving Note that we were not contractually required to make. Substantially all of the assets of the 2009 Entity serve as collateral for the Revolving Note. The Revolving Note bears interest, is subject to customary terms and conditions and may be repaid at any time without penalty prior to its 2026 maturity date. The advances under the Revolving Note were primarily used by the 2009 Entity to purchase additional private education loans under the 2009 Loan Program that otherwise may not have been originated. We have no immediate plans to significantly increase the amount of advances that we make to the 2009 Entity under the Revolving Note, but we may decide to do so in the foreseeable future. The 2009 Entity is a variable interest entity as defined under ASC 810. We held variable interests in the 2009 Entity as of June 30, 2012 as a result of the Revolving Note and 2009 RSA. To determine whether we were the primary beneficiary of the 2009 Entity, we:
Entity that could potentially be significant to the 2009 Entity. To identify the activities of the 2009 Entity that most significantly impact the economic performance of the 2009 Entity, we analyzed various possible scenarios of private education loan portfolio performance. In our analysis, we made what we believe are conservative assumptions based on historical data for the following key variables:
We determined that the activities of the 2009 Entity that most significantly impact its economic performance involve:
Based on our analysis, we concluded that we are not the primary beneficiary of the 2009 Entity, because we do not direct those activities. As a result, we are not required under ASC 810 to include the financial results of the 2009 Entity in our condensed consolidated financial statements for the three or six months ended June 30, 2012. Our conclusion that we are not the primary beneficiary of the 2009 Entity did not change from the prior reporting period. Therefore, there was no effect on our condensed consolidated financial statements. The carrying value of the Subordinated Note and the Revolving Note as of June 30, 2012 was approximately $19,000 and is included in Other assets on our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet. 9. Earnings Per Common Share Earnings per common share for all periods have been calculated in conformity with ASC 260, “Earnings Per Share”. This data is based on historical net income and the weighted average number of shares of our common stock outstanding during each period as set forth in the following table:
- 13 -
Table of ContentsA total of 1,520,036 shares at June 30, 2012 and 1,107,236 shares at June 30, 2011 were excluded from the calculation of our diluted earnings per common share, because the effect was anti-dilutive. 10. Employee Pension Benefits The following table sets forth the components of net periodic pension benefit of the ESI Pension Plan and ESI Excess Pension Plan for the periods indicated:
The benefit accruals under the ESI Pension Plan and ESI Excess Pension Plan were frozen effective March 31, 2006. As a result, no service cost has been included in the net periodic pension benefit. We did not make any contributions to the ESI Pension Plan or the ESI Excess Pension Plan in the three or six months ended June 30, 2012 or 2011. We do not expect to make any contributions to the ESI Pension Plan or the ESI Excess Pension Plan in 2012. 11. Contingencies As part of our normal operations, one of our insurers issues surety bonds for us that are required by various education authorities that regulate us. We are obligated to reimburse our insurer for any of those surety bonds that are paid by the insurer. As of June 30, 2012, the total face amount of those surety bonds was approximately $33,000. We are also subject to various claims and contingencies, including those related to litigation, business transactions, guarantee arrangements and employee-related matters, among others. We record a liability for those claims and contingencies, if it is probable that a loss will result and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. Although we believe that our estimates related to any claims and contingencies are reasonable, we cannot make any assurances with regard to the accuracy of our estimates, and actual results could differ materially. As of June 30, 2012, our recorded liability for these claims and contingencies was approximately $41,600, the substantial majority of which pertained to our guarantee arrangements. Approximately $6,000 of the recorded liability was included in Other current liabilities and approximately $35,600 was included in Other liabilities on our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet as of June 30, 2012. We also considered whether additional losses for claims and contingencies were reasonably possible, could be estimated and might be material to our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. With respect to our guarantee arrangements under the PEAKS Guarantee and the 2009 RSA and the risk sharing agreement that we entered into in 2007 (the “2007 RSA” and, collectively with the PEAKS Guarantee and the 2009 RSA, the “RSAs”), we believe that it is reasonably possible that we may incur losses in an estimated range of $15,000 less than to $15,000 greater than the recorded liability for those contingencies. As with any estimate, as facts and circumstances change, the recorded liability and estimated range of reasonably possible losses could change significantly. With respect to legal proceedings, we determined that we cannot provide an estimate of the possible losses, or the range of possible losses, in excess of the amount, if any, accrued, for various reasons, including but not limited to some or all of the following:
Litigation. We are subject to various litigation in the ordinary course of our business. We cannot assure you of the ultimate outcome of any litigation involving us. Although we believe that our estimates related to any litigation are reasonable, deviations from our estimates could produce a materially different result. Any litigation alleging violations of education or consumer protection laws and/or regulations, misrepresentation, fraud or deceptive practices may also subject our affected campuses to additional regulatory scrutiny. The following is a description of pending litigation that falls outside the scope of litigation incidental to the ordinary course of our business.
- 14 -
Table of ContentsOn November 3, 2010, a complaint in a securities class action lawsuit was filed against us and two of our current executive officers in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York under the following caption: Operating Engineers Construction Industry and Miscellaneous Pension Fund, Individually and On Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. ITT Educational Services, Inc., et al. (the “Securities Litigation”). On January 21, 2011, the court named the Wyoming Retirement System as the lead plaintiff in the Securities Litigation. On April 1, 2011, an amended complaint was filed in the Securities Litigation under the following caption: In re ITT Educational Services, Inc. Securities and Shareholder Derivative Litigation. The amended complaint alleged, among other things, that:
The putative class period in this action was from October 23, 2008 through August 13, 2010. The plaintiff sought, among other things, the designation of this action as a class action, and an award of unspecified compensatory damages, interest, costs, expenses, attorneys’ fees and expert fees. On November 12, 2010, a complaint in a shareholder derivative lawsuit was filed against three of our current executive officers, all of our current Directors and one of our former Directors in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York under the following caption: Antonio Cosing, Derivatively and On Behalf of ITT Educational Services, Inc. v. Kevin M. Modany, et al. (the “Cosing Lawsuit”). The complaint alleged, among other things, that from October 23, 2008 through August 13, 2010, the defendants breached their fiduciary duties to us, abused their ability to control and influence us, grossly mismanaged us, caused us to waste corporate assets and were unjustly enriched, by making false and misleading statements and engaging in fraudulent business practices. The complaint sought, among other things, unspecified damages, equitable and/or injunctive relief, restitution, disgorgement of profits, benefits and other compensation, an order directing us to reform our corporate governance and internal procedures, costs, disbursements and attorneys’ fees. On December 14, 2010, the Cosing Lawsuit was consolidated into the Securities Litigation. On December 3, 2010, another complaint in a shareholder derivative lawsuit was filed against two of our current executive officers, all of our current Directors and one of our former Directors in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York under the following caption: J. Kent Gregory, derivatively on behalf of ITT Educational Services, Inc. v. Kevin M. Modany, et al. (the “Gregory Lawsuit”). The complaint alleged, among other things, that the defendants breached their fiduciary duties to us, were unjustly enriched by us and misappropriated information about us, by making false and misleading statements and engaging in fraudulent business practices. The complaint sought, among other things, unspecified damages, restitution, disgorgement of profits, benefits and other compensation, an order directing us to reform our corporate governance and internal procedures, costs, disbursements and attorneys’ fees. The Gregory Lawsuit was consolidated into the Cosing Lawsuit on December 13, 2010 and further consolidated into the Securities Litigation on December 14, 2010. On March 30, 2012, all of the claims alleged in the Securities Litigation were dismissed with prejudice, including the claims in the Cosing Lawsuit and Gregory Lawsuit. On November 22, 2010, another complaint in a shareholder derivative lawsuit was filed against seven of our current and former officers, all of our current Directors and one of our former Directors in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana under the following caption: Roger B. Orensteen, derivatively on behalf of ITT Educational Services, Inc. v. Kevin M. Modany, et al (the “Orensteen Lawsuit”). The complaint alleged, among other things, that, from January 2008 through August 2010, the defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act, breached their fiduciary duties to us, abused their ability to control and influence us, grossly mismanaged us, caused us to waste corporate assets and were unjustly enriched, by making false and misleading statements and engaging in fraudulent business practices. The complaint sought, among other things, unspecified damages, restitution, disgorgement of profits, benefits and other compensation, an order directing us to reform our corporate governance and internal procedures, costs, disbursements and attorneys’ fees. On June 27, 2012, the Orensteen Lawsuit was dismissed without prejudice. There can be no assurance that the ultimate outcome of derivative actions, federal or state securities law claims or other actions would not have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. Guarantees. We entered into the PEAKS Guarantee in connection with the PEAKS Program. Under the PEAKS Guarantee, we guarantee payment of the principal, interest and certain call premiums owed on the PEAKS Senior Debt, and the administrative fees and expenses of the PEAKS Trust. The PEAKS Senior Debt bears interest at a variable rate based on the LIBOR plus an applicable margin and matures in January 2020. The PEAKS Guarantee agreement contains, among other things, representations and warranties and events of default customary for guarantees. In addition, under the PEAKS Program, some or all of the holders of the PEAKS Senior Debt could require us to purchase their PEAKS Senior Debt in certain limited circumstances that pertain to our continued eligibility to participate in the federal student financial aid programs under Title IV (the “Title IV Programs”) of the
- 15 -
Table of ContentsHigher Education Act of 1965, as amended (the “HEA”). We believe that the likelihood of those limited circumstances occurring is remote. Our guarantee and purchase obligations under the PEAKS Program remain in effect until the PEAKS Senior Debt and the PEAKS Trust’s fees and expenses are paid in full. At such time, we will be entitled to repayment of the amount of any payments made under the PEAKS Guarantee to the extent that funds are remaining in the PEAKS Trust. The maximum future payments that we could be required to make under the PEAKS Guarantee include:
We are not able to estimate the undiscounted maximum potential amount of future payments that we could be required to make under the PEAKS Guarantee, because those payments will be affected by:
No new private education loans were or will be originated under the PEAKS Program after July 2011, but immaterial amounts related to loans originated prior to that date were disbursed by the lender through March 2012. We entered into the 2009 RSA in connection with the 2009 Loan Program. Under the 2009 RSA, we guarantee the repayment of the principal amount (including capitalized origination fees) and accrued interest payable on any private education loans that are charged off above a certain percentage of the private education loans made under the 2009 Loan Program, based on the annual dollar volume. The total initial principal amount of private education loans that the 2009 Entity purchased under the 2009 Loan Program was approximately $141,000. No new private education loans were or will be originated under the 2009 Loan Program after December 31, 2011, but immaterial amounts related to loans originated prior to that date were disbursed by the lender through June 2012. Our obligations under the 2009 RSA will remain in effect until all private education loans made under the 2009 Loan Program are paid in full or charged off. The standard repayment term for a private education loan made under the 2009 Loan Program is ten years, with repayment generally beginning six months after a student graduates or three months after a student withdraws or is terminated from his or her program of study. Pursuant to the 2009 RSA, we are required to maintain collateral to secure our guarantee obligation in an amount equal to a percentage of the outstanding balance of private education loans disbursed to our students under the 2009 Loan Program. As of June 30, 2012, the total collateral maintained in a restricted bank account was not material. This amount is included in Other assets on our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet as of June 30, 2012. The 2009 RSA also requires that we comply with certain covenants, including that we maintain certain financial ratios which are measured on a quarterly basis. We were in compliance with these covenants as of June 30, 2012. We entered into the 2007 RSA with a different lender for certain private education loans that were made to our students in 2007 and early 2008. We guarantee the repayment of any private education loans that the lender charges off above a certain percentage of the total dollar volume of private education loans made under the 2007 RSA. We will have the right to pursue repayment from the borrowers for those charged off private education loans under the 2007 RSA that we pay to the lender pursuant to our guarantee obligation. The 2007 RSA was terminated effective February 22, 2008, such that no private education loans have been or will be made under the 2007 RSA after that date. Based on information that we have received to date from the lender, we believe that the total original principal amount of private education loans made under the 2007 RSA, net of amounts refunded under those loans, was approximately $180,000. Our obligations under the 2007 RSA will remain in effect until all private education loans under the agreement are paid in full or charged off by the lender. The standard repayment term for a private education loan made under the 2007 RSA is ten years, with repayment generally beginning six months after a student graduates, withdraws or is terminated from his or her program of study. As of June 30, 2012, we had made guarantee payments that were not material under the RSAs. At the end of each reporting period, we assess whether we should recognize a contingent liability related to our guarantees under the RSAs and, if so, in what amount. Our recorded liability for the obligations related to the guarantee arrangements under the RSAs is included in Other liabilities on our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.
- 16 -
Table of ContentsItem 2. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations. Forward-Looking Statements All statements, trend analyses and other information contained in this report that are not historical facts are forward-looking statements within the meaning of the safe harbor provision of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and as defined in Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 (the “Securities Act”) and Section 21E of the Exchange Act. Forward-looking statements are made based on our management’s current expectations and beliefs concerning future developments and their potential effects on us. You can identify those statements by the use of words such as “could,” “should,” “would,” “may,” “will,” “project,” “believe,” “anticipate,” “expect,” “plan,” “estimate,” “forecast,” “potential,” “intend,” “continue” and “contemplate,” as well as similar words and expressions. Forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties and do not guarantee future performance. We cannot assure you that future developments affecting us will be those anticipated by our management. Among the factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in our forward-looking statements are the following:
Readers are also directed to other risks and uncertainties discussed in other documents we file with the SEC, including, without limitation, those discussed in Item 1A. “Risk Factors.” of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011 filed with the SEC, in Part II, Item 1A. “Risk Factors” of our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2012 and in Part II, Item 1A. “Risk Factors” of this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q. We undertake no obligation to update or revise any forward-looking information, whether as a result of new information, future developments or otherwise. Overview You should keep in mind the following points as you read this report:
This management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations should be read in conjunction with the same titled section contained in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011 filed with the SEC for discussion of, among other matters, the following items:
This management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations is based on our condensed consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States. The preparation of these financial statements requires us to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amount of assets, liabilities, revenue, expenses, and contingent assets and liabilities. Actual results may differ from those estimates and judgments under different assumptions or conditions.
- 17 -
Table of ContentsIn this management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations, when we discuss factors that contributed to a change in our financial condition or results of operations, we disclose the primary factors that materially contributed to that change. Background We are a leading proprietary provider of postsecondary degree programs in the United States based on revenue and student enrollment. As of June 30, 2012, we were offering master, bachelor and associate degree programs to approximately 66,000 students. As of June 30, 2012, we had 149 college locations (including 146 campuses and three learning sites) in 39 states. In addition, we offered one or more of our online programs to students who are located in 48 states. All of our college locations are authorized by the applicable education authorities of the states in which they operate, and are accredited by an accrediting commission recognized by the ED. We design our education programs, after consultation with employers and other constituents, to help graduates prepare for careers in various fields involving their areas of study. We have provided career-oriented education programs since 1969 under the “ITT Technical Institute” name and since June 2009 under the “Daniel Webster College” name. In the second quarter of 2012, we began operations at one new ITT Technical Institute campus. We plan to begin operations at one new location during the remainder of 2012. Our strategy is to pursue multiple opportunities for growth. We are implementing a growth strategy designed to:
We intend to pursue this strategy by:
Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates The preparation of our condensed consolidated financial statements requires us to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amount of assets, liabilities, revenue, expenses, and contingent assets and liabilities. Actual results may differ from those estimates and judgments under different assumptions or conditions. We have discussed the critical accounting policies that we believe affect our more significant estimates and judgments used in the preparation of our consolidated financial statements in the “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of the Operations – Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates” section of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011 filed with the SEC. There have been no material changes to those critical accounting policies or the underlying accounting estimates or judgments. New Accounting Guidance In December 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-12, which is included in the Codification under ASC 220. This update defers the effective date of ASU No. 2011-05 for changes that relate to the presentation of reclassification adjustments out of accumulated other comprehensive income. None of the other requirements in ASU 2011-05 are affected by this update. This guidance became effective for our interim and annual reporting periods beginning January 1, 2012. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on our condensed consolidated financial statements.
- 18 -
Table of ContentsAlso in December 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-11, which is included in the Codification under ASC 210. This update provides for enhanced disclosures to help users of financial statements evaluate the effect or potential effect of netting arrangements on an entity’s financial position. This guidance is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning January 1, 2013. We have not yet determined the effect that the adoption of this guidance will have on our condensed consolidated financial statements. In September 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-08, which is included in the Codification under ASC 350. This update allows an entity to assess qualitative factors to determine whether it is necessary to perform the two-step quantitative goodwill impairment test. This guidance became effective for our interim and annual reporting periods beginning January 1, 2012. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on our condensed consolidated financial statements. In June 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-05, which is included in the Codification under ASC 220. This update requires total comprehensive income, the components of net income and the components of other comprehensive income to be presented either in a single continuous statement or in two separate but consecutive statements. This guidance became effective for our interim and annual reporting periods beginning January 1, 2012. Prior to January 1, 2012, we presented total Comprehensive income and the components of Other comprehensive income in our Condensed Consolidated Statement of Shareholders’ Equity. After December 31, 2011, we present total Comprehensive income and the components of Other comprehensive income in our Condensed Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income. In May 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-04, which is included in the Codification under ASC 820. This update provides guidance and clarification about the application of existing fair value measurements and disclosure requirements. This guidance became effective for our interim and annual reporting periods beginning January 1, 2012. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on our condensed consolidated financial statements. Results of Operations The following table sets forth the percentage relationship of certain statement of income data to revenue for the periods indicated:
The following table sets forth our total student enrollment as of the dates indicated:
Total student enrollment includes all new and continuing students. A continuing student is any student who, in the academic term being measured, is enrolled in a program of study at one of our campuses and was enrolled in the same program at any of our campuses at the end of the immediately preceding academic term. A new student is any student who, in the academic term being measured, enrolls in and begins attending any program of study at one of our campuses:
The following table sets forth our new student enrollment in the periods indicated:
- 19 -
Table of ContentsWe believe that the decrease in new student enrollment in the three months ended June 30, 2012 compared to the three months ended June 30, 2011 was primarily due to:
We believe that the decrease in new student enrollment in the three months ended March 31, 2012 compared to the three months ended March 31, 2011 was primarily due to:
A continued decline in new and total student enrollment could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, revenue and other results of operations and cash flows. We have taken a number of steps in an attempt to reverse the decline in total and new student enrollment, including, without limitation, refining our marketing, advertising and communications to focus more on the student value proposition and outcomes of an ITT Technical Institute education. At the vast majority of our campuses, we generally organize the academic schedule for programs of study offered on the basis of four 12-week academic quarters in a calendar year. The academic quarters typically begin in early March, mid-June, early September and late November or early December. To measure the persistence of our students, the number of continuing students in any academic term is divided by the total student enrollment in the immediately preceding academic term. The following table sets forth the rates of our students’ persistence as of the dates indicated:
The decrease in student persistence as of June 30 and March 31, 2012 compared to the corresponding prior year dates was primarily due to a higher number of students who graduated at the end of the academic period that began in March 2012 and December 2011 compared to the end of the same academic period in the prior year. Three Months Ended June 30, 2012 Compared with Three Months Ended June 30, 2011. Revenue decreased $58.1 million, or 15.0%, to $329.8 million in the three months ended June 30, 2012 compared to $387.9 million in the three months ended June 30, 2011. The primary factors that contributed to this decrease included, in order of significance:
The decrease in revenue was partially offset by a lesser impact of the private education loan programs, which expired in 2011, on our revenue recognition in the three months ended June 30, 2012 compared to the same prior year period. The primary factors that contributed to the decrease in total student enrollment as of March 31, 2012 compared to March 31, 2011 included, in order of significance:
The primary factors that contributed to the decrease in total student enrollment as of June 30, 2012 compared to June 30, 2011 included, in order of significance:
Cost of educational services decreased $1.3 million, or 0.9%, to $140.9 million in the three months ended June 30, 2012 compared to $142.3 million in the three months ended June 30, 2011. The primary factor that contributed to this decrease was a decrease in compensation costs, which was partially offset by the increased costs associated with operating new campuses.
- 20 -
Table of ContentsCost of educational services as a percentage of revenue increased 600 basis points to 42.7% in the three months ended June 30, 2012 compared to 36.7% in the three months ended June 30, 2011. The primary factor that contributed to this increase was a decline in revenue, which was partially offset by a decrease in compensation costs. Student services and administrative expenses decreased $4.2 million, or 3.6%, to $111.5 million in the three months ended June 30, 2012 compared to $115.6 million in the three months ended June 30, 2011. The principal causes of this decrease were decreases in expenses related to student scholarships and media advertising expenses, which were partially offset by an increase in bad debt expense. Student services and administrative expenses increased to 33.8% of revenue in the three months ended June 30, 2012 compared to 29.8% of revenue in the three months ended June 30, 2011. The principal causes of this increase were a decline in revenue and an increase in bad debt expense, which were partially offset by decreases in expenses related to student scholarships and media advertising expenses. Bad debt expense as a percentage of revenue increased to 5.8% in the three months ended June 30, 2012 compared to 4.5% in the three months ended June 30, 2011, primarily as a result of an increase in the amount of internal student financing that we provided to our students in the three months ended June 30, 2012 compared to the three months ended June 30, 2011. The increase in the amount of internal student financing was primarily due to a decline in the amount of private education loans available to our students in the three months ended June 30, 2012 as a result of the expiration in 2011 of the two private education loan programs that provided the vast majority of private education loans to our students in 2011. Operating income decreased $52.6 million, or 40.4%, to $77.4 million in the three months ended June 30, 2012 compared to $130.0 million in the three months ended June 30, 2011, primarily as a result of the impact of the factors discussed above in connection with revenue, cost of educational services, and student services and administrative expenses. Our operating margin decreased to 23.5% in the three months ended June 30, 2012 compared to 33.5% in the three months ended June 30, 2011, primarily as a result of the impact of the factors discussed above. Interest income decreased $0.3 million, or 36.5%, to $0.5 million in the three months ended June 30, 2012 compared to $0.8 million in the three months ended June 30, 2011, primarily due to lower investment balances. Interest expense increased $0.8 million, or 147.3%, to $1.3 million in the three months ended June 30, 2012 compared to $0.5 million in the three months ended June 30, 2011, primarily due to an increase in the effective interest rate on our revolving credit facility. Our combined federal and state effective income tax rate was 40.0% in the three months ended June 30, 2012 compared to 39.4% in the three months ended June 30, 2011. Our combined effective income tax rate increased primarily due to settlements of certain state income tax audits and changes in state income tax laws. Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 Compared with Six Months Ended June 30, 2011. Revenue decreased $99.4 million, or 12.9%, to $671.6 million in the six months ended June 30, 2012 compared to $771.0 million in the six months ended June 30, 2011. The primary factors that contributed to this decrease included, in order of significance:
The decrease in revenue was partially offset by a lesser impact of the private education loan programs, which expired in 2011, on our revenue recognition in the six months ended June 30, 2012 compared to the same prior year period. Cost of educational services decreased $4.3 million, or 1.5%, to $275.9 million in the six months ended June 30, 2012 compared to $280.2 million in the six months ended June 30, 2011. The primary factors that contributed to this decrease included, in order of significance:
Cost of educational services as a percentage of revenue increased 480 basis points to 41.1% in the six months ended June 30, 2012 compared to 36.3% in the six months ended June 30, 2011. The primary factor that contributed to this increase was a decline in revenue, which was partially offset by decreases in compensation costs and legal expenses. Student services and administrative expenses decreased $2.5 million, or 1.1%, to $217.7 million in the six months ended June 30, 2012 compared to $220.2 million in the six months ended June 30, 2011. The principal cause of this decrease was a decrease in expenses related to student scholarships, which was partially offset by an increase in bad debt expense. Student services and administrative expenses increased to 32.4% of revenue in the six months ended June 30, 2012 compared to 28.6% of revenue in the six months ended June 30, 2011. The principal causes of this increase were a decline in revenue and an increase in bad debt expense, which were partially offset by a decrease in expenses related to student scholarships. Bad debt expense as a percentage of revenue increased to 5.2% in the six months ended June 30, 2012 compared to 3.9% in the six months ended June 30, 2011, primarily as a result of an increase in the amount of internal student financing that we provided to our students in the six months ended June 30, 2012 compared to the six months ended June 30, 2011. The increase in the amount of internal student financing was primarily due to a decline in the amount of private education loans available to our students in the six months ended June 30, 2012 as a result of the expiration in 2011 of the two private education loan programs that provided the vast majority of private education loans to our students in 2011.
- 21 -
Table of ContentsOperating income decreased $92.6 million, or 34.2%, to $178.0 million in the six months ended June 30, 2012 compared to $270.6 million in the six months ended June 30, 2011, primarily as a result of the impact of the factors discussed above in connection with revenue, cost of educational services, and student services and administrative expenses. Our operating margin decreased to 26.5% in the six months ended June 30, 2012 compared to 35.1% in the six months ended June 30, 2011, primarily as a result of the impact of the factors discussed above. Interest income decreased $0.4 million, or 27.2%, to $1.2 million in the six months ended June 30, 2012 compared to $1.6 million in the six months ended June 30, 2011, primarily due to lower investment balances. Interest expense increased $0.7 million, or 69.5%, to $1.8 million in the six months ended June 30, 2012 compared to $1.1 million in the six months ended June 30, 2011, primarily due to an increase in the effective interest rate on our revolving credit facility. Our combined federal and state effective income tax rate was 39.6% in the six months ended June 30, 2012 compared to 39.4% in the six months ended June 30, 2011. Our combined effective income tax rate increased primarily due to changes in state income tax laws. Financial Condition, Liquidity and Capital Resources Cash and cash equivalents were $167.2 million as of June 30, 2012 compared to $229.0 million as of December 31, 2011 and $158.2 million as of June 30, 2011. We had no short-term investments as of June 30, 2012 compared to $148.5 million as of December 31, 2011 and $147.1 million as of June 30, 2011. In total, our cash and cash equivalents and short-term investments were $167.2 million as of June 30, 2012 compared to $377.5 million as of December 31, 2011 and $305.4 million as of June 30, 2011. Cash and cash equivalents and short-term investments as of June 30, 2012 decreased:
We are required to recognize the funded status of our defined benefit postretirement plans on our balance sheet. We recorded an asset of $5.9 million for the ESI Pension Plan, a non-contributory defined benefit pension plan commonly referred to as a cash balance plan, and a liability of $0.3 million for the ESI Excess Pension Plan, a nonqualified, unfunded retirement plan, on our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet as of June 30, 2012. We do not expect to make any contributions to the ESI Pension Plan or the ESI Excess Pension Plan in 2012. In 2011, we did not make any contributions to either the ESI Pension Plan or ESI Excess Pension Plan. Operations. Net cash used in operating activities was $38.3 million in the three months ended June 30, 2012 compared to net cash generated from operating activities of $60.6 million in the three months ended June 30, 2011. The $98.9 million decrease in net cash flows from operating activities was primarily due to lower student enrollments and a decrease in the amount of funds received from private education loans made to our students by third-party lenders. Net cash used in operating activities was $1.0 million in the six months ended June 30, 2012 compared to net cash generated from operating activities of $242.7 million in the six months ended June 30, 2011. The $243.7 million decrease in net cash flows from operating activities was primarily due to lower student enrollments and a decrease in the amount of funds received from private education loans made to our students by third-party lenders. Accounts receivable less allowance for doubtful accounts was $73.7 million as of June 30, 2012 compared to $47.0 million as of June 30, 2011. Days sales outstanding increased 9.3 days to 20.3 days at June 30, 2012 compared to 11.0 days at June 30, 2011. Our accounts receivable balance and days sales outstanding increased as of June 30, 2012, primarily due to an increase in internal student financing resulting from a decrease in the amount of funds received from private education loans made to our students by third-party lenders. Investing. In the three months ended June 30, 2012, we spent $0.3 million to renovate, expand and construct buildings compared to $1.2 million for similar expenditures in the three months ended June 30, 2011. In the six months ended June 30, 2012, we spent $0.4 million to renovate, expand or construct buildings compared to $1.7 million for similar expenditures in the six months ended June 30, 2011. Capital expenditures, excluding facility and land purchases and facility construction, totaled:
These expenditures consisted primarily of classroom and laboratory equipment (such as computers and electronic equipment), classroom and office furniture, software and leasehold improvements.
- 22 -
Table of ContentsWe plan to continue to upgrade and expand our current facilities and equipment in 2012. Cash generated from operations is expected to be sufficient to fund our capital expenditure requirements. Financing. We were a party to the Prior Credit Agreement which provided that we could borrow up to $150.0 million under two revolving credit facilities: one in the maximum principal amount of $50.0 million; and the other in the maximum principal amount of $100.0 million. We could borrow under each credit facility on either a secured or unsecured basis at our election, provided that we were not in default under the Prior Credit Agreement. Borrowings under the Prior Credit Agreement bore interest, at our option, at the LIBOR plus an applicable margin or at an alternative base rate as defined under the Prior Credit Agreement. We paid a facility fee equal to 0.25% per annum on the daily amount of the commitment (whether used or unused) under the Prior Credit Agreement. On March 21, 2012, we entered into the New Credit Agreement that provides for a Revolver in the amount of $325.0 million. The New Credit Agreement also provides that we may seek additional revolving commitments or term loan commitments in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $125.0 million. The lenders under the New Credit Agreement are not under any obligation to provide any such additional revolving commitments or term loan commitments. The New Credit Agreement has a maturity date of March 21, 2015. A portion of the borrowings under of the Revolver were used to prepay the entire outstanding indebtedness under the Prior Credit Agreement. The Prior Credit Agreement was also terminated on March 21, 2012. In addition to the prepayment of the outstanding indebtedness under the Prior Credit Agreement, borrowings under the New Credit Agreement will be used for general corporate purposes. Borrowings under the New Credit Agreement bear interest, at our option, at LIBOR plus an applicable margin or at an alternative base rate, as defined under the New Credit Agreement, plus an applicable margin. The applicable margin for borrowings under the Revolver is determined based on the Leverage Ratio as of the end of each fiscal quarter. We also pay a commitment fee on the amount of the unutilized commitments under the New Credit Agreement. The amount of the commitment fee is determined based on the Leverage Ratio as of the end of each fiscal quarter. The New Credit Agreement contains, among other things, covenants, representations and warranties and events of default customary for credit facilities. The New Credit Agreement is secured by a pledge of the equity interests of our subsidiaries and is guaranteed by one of our subsidiaries. We are required to maintain compliance with a maximum Leverage Ratio, a minimum interest coverage ratio, a minimum liquidity amount and several ratios related to the ED’s regulations. We were in compliance with those requirements as of June 30, 2012. As of June 30, 2012, the borrowings under the New Credit Agreement totaled $150.0 million and bore interest at a weighted average rate of 2.25% per annum. The effective interest rate on our borrowings was approximately 2.70% per annum in the three months ended June 30, 2012 and approximately 1.30% per annum in the three months ended June 30, 2011. In the six months ended June 30, 2012, the effective interest rate on our borrowings was approximately 2.10% per annum compared to approximately 1.40% per annum in the six months ended June 30, 2011. The commitment fee under the New Credit Agreement was 0.30% as of June 30, 2012. Our Board of Directors has authorized us to repurchase shares of our common stock in the open market or through privately negotiated transactions in accordance with Rule 10b-18 of the Exchange Act under the Repurchase Program. The following table sets forth information regarding our share repurchase activity in the periods indicated:
Approximately 7.8 million shares remained available for repurchase under the Repurchase Program as of June 30, 2012. Pursuant to the Board’s stock repurchase authorization, we may repurchase additional shares of our common stock from time to time in the future depending on market conditions and other considerations. We believe that cash generated from operations and our investments will be adequate to satisfy our working capital, loan repayment and capital expenditure requirements for the foreseeable future. We also believe that any reduction in cash and cash equivalents or investments that may result from their use to provide student financing, purchase facilities, construct facilities, repay loans or repurchase shares of our common stock will not have a material adverse effect on our expansion plans, planned capital expenditures, ability to meet any applicable regulatory financial responsibility standards or ability to conduct normal operations. Private Student Financing Update. In 2011 and 2010, we received funds on behalf of our students from unaffiliated private education loan programs, which represented, in the aggregate, approximately 7% of our cash receipts in 2011 and 12% of our cash receipts in 2010. As previously discussed, the two private education loan programs that provided the vast majority of private education loans to our students in 2011 and 2010 expired in 2011. As a result, in the first six months of 2012, we have increased the amount of internal student financing that we provide to our students.
- 23 -
Table of ContentsThe increased internal student financing that we have provided to our students has negatively impacted our liquidity and exposed us to greater credit risk. Internal student financing provides for payments to us by our students over an extended term, which has had a material adverse effect on our cash flows from operations in the first six months of 2012. In addition, we have the risk of collection with respect to our internal student financing, which has caused us to increase our allowance for doubtful accounts as of June 30, 2012 compared to June 30, 2011 and has resulted in an increase in our bad debt expense as a percentage of revenue in the first six months of 2012 compared to the same prior year period. Increases in internal student financing also increased our accounts receivable and our days sales outstanding as of June 30, 2012 compared to June 30, 2011. Further, our deferred revenue decreased as of June 30, 2012 compared to June 30, 2011, primarily due to the decrease in the amount of funds received from private education loans made to our students by third-party lenders. A continued lack of availability of private education loans for our students will continue to materially adversely impact our financial condition and cash flows. We are pursuing arrangements with unaffiliated lenders for them to provide private education loans to our students and their parents who qualify. We cannot assure you, however, that we will be able to timely identify alternative lenders on terms as favorable to us as the previous programs were, or at all. Adverse market conditions for consumer loans and student loans, including lenders’ difficulties in reselling or syndicating student loan portfolios, have resulted and could continue to result in providers of private education loans reducing the availability of, or increasing the costs associated with, providing those loans to students. The loan underwriting standards can vary significantly among lenders, which could adversely affect the ability of some of our students to obtain private education loans. In particular, private education loans to students with low credit scores are difficult to obtain. During such time as our students and their parents are unable to obtain private education loans, we intend to continue to provide internal student financing to our students, which will result in a continuation of the adverse factors that are described in the preceding paragraph, including a material adverse effect on our financial condition and cash flows. Contractual Obligations The following table sets forth our specified contractual obligations as of June 30, 2012:
The long-term debt represents the Revolver under the New Credit Agreement and assumes that the $150.0 million outstanding balance under the Revolver as of June 30, 2012 will be outstanding at all times through the date of maturity. The amounts shown include the principal payments that will be due upon maturity as well as interest payments and commitment fees. Interest payments and commitment fees have been calculated based on their scheduled payment dates using the interest rate charged on our borrowings and the rate charged on unutilized commitments as of June 30, 2012. Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements As of June 30, 2012, we leased our non-owned facilities under operating lease agreements. A majority of the operating leases contain renewal options that can be exercised after the initial lease term. Renewal options are generally for periods of one to five years. All operating leases will expire over the next 12 years and management believes that:
There are no material restrictions imposed by the lease agreements, and we have not entered into any significant guarantees related to the leases. We are required to make additional payments under the terms of certain operating leases for taxes, insurance and other operating expenses incurred during the operating lease period. As part of our normal course of operations, one of our insurers issues surety bonds for us that are required by various education authorities that regulate us. We are obligated to reimburse our insurer for any of those surety bonds that are paid by the insurer. As of June 30, 2012, the total face amount of those surety bonds was approximately $33.0 million. On January 20, 2010, we entered into agreements with unrelated parties to establish the PEAKS Program. Under the PEAKS Program, an unaffiliated lender originated private education loans to our eligible students and, subsequently, sold those loans to the PEAKS Trust. The PEAKS Trust issued PEAKS Senior Debt in the aggregate principal amount of $300.0 million to investors. The assets of the PEAKS Trust (which include, among other assets, the student loans held by the PEAKS Trust) serve as collateral for, and are intended to be the principal source of, the repayment of the PEAKS Senior Debt. The PEAKS Trust is required to maintain assets having an aggregate value that exceeds the outstanding balance of the PEAKS Senior Debt. As of June 30, 2012, the value of the assets of the PEAKS Trust satisfied this requirement. The PEAKS Senior Debt bears interest at a variable rate based on the LIBOR plus a margin and matures in January 2020. As of June 30, 2012, the outstanding principal balance of the PEAKS Senior Debt was approximately $284.0 million.
- 24 -
Table of ContentsIn connection with the PEAKS Program, the lender disbursed the proceeds of the private education loans to us for application to the students’ account balances with us that represent their unpaid education costs. We transferred to the PEAKS Trust a portion of the amount of each private student loan disbursed to us under the PEAKS Program, in exchange for a Subordinated Note. The Subordinated Note does not bear interest, and principal is due on the Subordinated Note following the repayment of the PEAKS Senior Debt, the payment of fees and expenses of the PEAKS Trust and the reimbursement of the amount of any payments made by us under the PEAKS Guarantee. The PEAKS Trust utilized the proceeds from the issuance of the PEAKS Senior Debt and the Subordinated Note to purchase the student loans from the lender. Under the PEAKS Guarantee, we guarantee payment of the principal, interest and certain call premiums owed on the PEAKS Senior Debt, and the administrative fees and expenses of the PEAKS Trust. The PEAKS Guarantee contains, among other things, representations and warranties and events of default customary for guarantees. In addition, under the PEAKS Program, some or all of the holders of the PEAKS Senior Debt could require us to purchase their PEAKS Senior Debt in certain limited circumstances that pertain to our continued eligibility to participate in the Title IV Programs. We believe that the likelihood of those limited circumstances occurring is remote. Our guarantee and purchase obligations under the PEAKS Program remain in effect until the PEAKS Senior Debt and the PEAKS Trust’s fees and expenses are paid in full. At such time, we will be entitled to repayment of the amount of any payments made under our guarantee and payment of the Subordinated Note, in each case only to the extent of available funds remaining in the PEAKS Trust. We entered into the PEAKS Program to offer our students another source of private education loans that they could use to help pay their education costs owed to us and to supplement the limited amount of private education loans available to our students under other private education loans programs, including the 2009 Loan Program. Under the PEAKS Program, our students had access to a greater amount of private education loans, which resulted in a reduction in the amount of internal financing that we provided to our students. No new private education loans were or will be originated under the PEAKS Program after July 2011, but immaterial amounts related to loans originated prior to that date were disbursed by the lender through March 2012. On February 20, 2009, we entered into the 2009 Loan Program. In connection with the 2009 Loan Program, we entered into the 2009 RSA. Under the 2009 RSA, we guarantee the repayment of the principal amount (including capitalized origination fees) and accrued interest payable on any private education loans that are charged off above a certain percentage of the private education loans made under the 2009 Loan Program, based on the annual dollar volume. The total initial principal amount of private education loans that the 2009 Entity purchased under the 2009 Loan Program was approximately $141.0 million. No new private education loans were or will be made under the 2009 Loan Program after December 31, 2011, but immaterial amounts related to loans originated prior to that date were disbursed by the lender through June 2012. Our obligations under the 2009 RSA will remain in effect until all private education loans made under the 2009 Loan Program are paid in full or charged off. The standard repayment term for a private education loan made under the 2009 Loan Program is ten years, with repayment generally beginning six months after a student graduates or three months after a student withdraws or is terminated from his or her program of study. Pursuant to the 2009 RSA, we are required to maintain collateral to secure our guarantee obligation in an amount equal to a percentage of the outstanding balance of private education loans disbursed to our students under the 2009 Loan Program. As of June 30, 2012, the total collateral maintained in a restricted bank account was not material. The 2009 RSA also requires that we comply with certain covenants, including that we maintain certain financial ratios which are measured on a quarterly basis. We were in compliance with these covenants as of June 30, 2012. In addition, beginning in the second quarter of 2009, we have made advances to the 2009 Entity under the Revolving Note. We made the advances, which bear interest, so that the 2009 Entity could use those funds primarily to provide additional funding for the private education loans, instead of retaining the funds ourselves and providing internal student financing, which is non-interest bearing. The Revolving Note bears interest at a rate based on the prime rate plus an applicable margin. Substantially all of the assets of the third party serve as collateral for the Revolving Note. The Revolving Note is subject to customary terms and conditions and may be repaid at any time without penalty prior to its 2026 maturity date. We also are a party to the 2007 RSA with a different lender for certain private education loans that were made to our students in 2007 and early 2008. We guarantee the repayment of any private education loans that the lender charges off above a certain percentage of the total dollar volume of private education loans made under the 2007 RSA. We will have the right to pursue repayment from the borrowers for those charged off private education loans under the 2007 RSA that we pay to the lender pursuant to our guarantee obligation. The 2007 RSA was terminated effective February 22, 2008, such that no private education loans have been or will be made under the 2007 RSA after that date. Based on information that we have received to date from the lender, we believe that the total original principal amount of private education loans made under the 2007 RSA, net of amounts refunded under those loans, was approximately $180.0 million. Our obligations under the 2007 RSA will remain in effect until all private education loans under the agreement are paid in full or charged off by the lender. The standard repayment term for a private education loan made under the 2007 RSA is ten years, with repayment generally beginning six months after a student graduates, withdraws or is terminated from his or her program of study.
- 25 -
Table of ContentsAs of June 30, 2012, we had made guarantee payments that were not material under the RSAs. See Notes 8 and 11 of the Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussion of the PEAKS Program, the 2009 RSA and the 2007 RSA. At the end of each reporting period, we assess whether we should recognize a contingent liability related to the various claims and contingencies that we are subject to, including those related to litigation, business transactions, guarantee arrangements and employee-related matters, among others. We record a liability for those claims and contingencies if it is probable that a loss will result and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. Although we believe that our estimates related to any claims and contingencies are reasonable, we cannot make any assurances with regard to the accuracy of our estimates, and actual results could differ materially. As of June 30, 2012, our recorded liability for these claims and contingencies was approximately $41.6 million, the substantial majority of which pertained to our guarantee arrangements under the RSAs. Approximately $6.0 million of the recorded liability was included in Other current liabilities and approximately $35.6 million was included in Other liabilities on our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet as of June 30, 2012. We review various factors when determining the amount to recognize as a contingent liability with respect to the guarantee arrangements under the RSAs at the end of each reporting period. The principal factor that we review is the repayment performance of the private education loans under each of the RSAs. As each portfolio of private education loans matures, additional data related to the performance of the loans and other information regarding the loans becomes available to us that we utilize to estimate the related contingent liability. In certain reporting periods, there have been disruptions in the servicing of a portion of the private education loans under the RSAs, which we believe has negatively impacted the repayment performance of those private education loans. We cannot predict with any certainty the extent to which the servicing disruptions may affect the repayment performance of those loans in future periods, or whether other servicing disruptions will occur in the future. If the effect of the servicing disruptions continues, additional servicing disruptions occur or other factors negatively impact the repayment performance of the private education loans under the RSAs, the contingent liability associated with those guarantees would increase. Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk. In the normal course of our business, we are subject to fluctuations in interest rates that could impact the cost of our financing activities. Our primary interest rate risk exposure results from changes in short-term interest rates and the LIBOR. Changes in the LIBOR would affect the borrowing costs associated with our revolving credit facilities. We estimate that the market risk can best be measured by a hypothetical 100 basis point increase in the LIBOR. If such a hypothetical increase in the LIBOR were to occur, the effect on our results from operations and cash flow would not have been material for the three and six months ended June 30, 2012. Item 4. Controls and Procedures. (a) Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures. We are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (“DCP”) that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by us in the reports filed by us under the Exchange Act is: (a) recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms; and (b) accumulated and communicated to our management, including our principal executive and principal financial officers, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosures. In designing and evaluating our DCP, we recognize that any controls and procedures, no matter how well designed and implemented, can provide only reasonable assurance of achieving the desired control objectives, and that our management’s duties require it to make its best judgment regarding the design of our DCP. As of the end of our second fiscal quarter of 2012, we conducted an evaluation, under the supervision (and with the participation) of our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our DCP pursuant to Rule 13a-15 of the Exchange Act. Based on that evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that our DCP were effective at the reasonable assurance level as of June 30, 2012. (b) Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting. There were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting that occurred during our most recently completed fiscal quarter that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting. PART II OTHER INFORMATION Item 1. Legal Proceedings. We are subject to various claims and contingencies in the ordinary course of our business, including those related to litigation, business transactions, employee-related matters and taxes, among others. We cannot assure you of the ultimate outcome of any litigation involving us. Any litigation alleging violations of education or consumer protection laws and/or regulations, misrepresentation, fraud or deceptive practices may also subject our affected campuses to additional regulatory scrutiny.
- 26 -
Table of ContentsOn November 3, 2010, a complaint in a securities class action lawsuit was filed against us and two of our current executive officers in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York under the following caption: Operating Engineers Construction Industry and Miscellaneous Pension Fund, Individually and On Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. ITT Educational Services, Inc., et al. (the “Securities Litigation”). On January 21, 2011, the court named the Wyoming Retirement System as the lead plaintiff in the Securities Litigation. On April 1, 2011, an amended complaint was filed in the Securities Litigation under the following caption: In re ITT Educational Services, Inc. Securities and Shareholder Derivative Litigation. The amended complaint alleged, among other things, that:
The putative class period in this action was from October 23, 2008 through August 13, 2010. The plaintiff sought, among other things, the designation of this action as a class action, and an award of unspecified compensatory damages, interest, costs, expenses, attorneys’ fees and expert fees. On November 12, 2010, a complaint in a shareholder derivative lawsuit was filed against three of our current executive officers, all of our current Directors and one of our former Directors in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York under the following caption: Antonio Cosing, Derivatively and On Behalf of ITT Educational Services, Inc. v. Kevin M. Modany, et al. (the “Cosing Lawsuit”). The complaint alleged, among other things, that from October 23, 2008 through August 13, 2010, the defendants breached their fiduciary duties to us, abused their ability to control and influence us, grossly mismanaged us, caused us to waste corporate assets and were unjustly enriched, by:
The complaint sought:
On December 14, 2010, the Cosing Lawsuit was consolidated into the Securities Litigation. On December 3, 2010, another complaint in a shareholder derivative lawsuit was filed against two of our current executive officers, all of our current Directors and one of our former Directors in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York under the following caption: J. Kent Gregory, derivatively on behalf of ITT Educational Services, Inc. v. Kevin M. Modany, et al. (the “Gregory Lawsuit”). The complaint alleged, among other things, that the defendants breached their fiduciary duties to us, were unjustly enriched by us and misappropriated information about us, by:
The complaint sought:
- 27 -
Table of ContentsThe Gregory Lawsuit was consolidated into the Cosing Lawsuit on December 13, 2010 and further consolidated into the Securities Litigation on December 14, 2010. On March 30, 2012, all of the claims alleged in the Securities Litigation were dismissed with prejudice, including the claims in the Cosing Lawsuit and Gregory Lawsuit. On November 22, 2010, another complaint in a shareholder derivative lawsuit was filed against seven of our current and former officers, all of our current Directors and one of our former Directors in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana under the following caption: Roger B. Orensteen, derivatively on behalf of ITT Educational Services, Inc. v. Kevin M. Modany, et al (the “Orensteen Lawsuit”). The complaint alleged, among other things, that, from January 2008 through August 2010, the defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act, breached their fiduciary duties to us, abused their ability to control and influence us, grossly mismanaged us, caused us to waste corporate assets and were unjustly enriched, by:
The complaint sought:
On June 27, 2012, the Orensteen Lawsuit was dismissed without prejudice. Although the derivative actions were brought nominally on behalf of us, we incurred defense costs and other expenses in connection with the derivative lawsuits. There can be no assurance that the ultimate outcome of derivative actions, federal or state securities law claims or other actions would not have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. The current and former officers named in one or more of the securities class action and shareholder derivative lawsuits described above included: Jeffrey R. Cooper, Clark D. Elwood, Nina F. Esbin, Eugene W. Feichtner, Daniel M. Fitzpatrick, Kevin M. Modany and Martin Van Buren. The former Director named in the shareholder derivative lawsuits described above is Lloyd G. Waterhouse. Certain of our current and former officers and Directors may become a party in certain actions. Our By-laws and Restated Certificate of Incorporation obligate us to indemnify our officers and Directors to the fullest extent permitted by Delaware law, provided that their conduct complied with certain requirements. We are obligated to advance defense costs to our officers and Directors, subject to the individual’s obligation to repay such amount if it is ultimately determined that the individual was not entitled to indemnification. In addition, our indemnity obligation can, under certain circumstances, include indemnifiable judgments, penalties, fines and amounts paid in settlement in connection with those actions. Item 1A. Risk Factors. You should carefully consider the risks and uncertainties we describe in this Report, our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011 and our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2012 before deciding to invest in, or retain, shares of our common stock. These are not the only risks and uncertainties that we face. Additional risks and uncertainties that we do not currently know about, we currently believe are immaterial or we have not predicted may also harm our business operations or adversely affect us. If any of these risks or uncertainties actually occurs, our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows or stock price could be materially adversely affected. Except as set forth below, there have been no material changes from the risk factors discussed in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011 and our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2012.
- 28 -
Table of ContentsIf the ED’s vacated gainful employment regulations are reinstituted and if any of our programs of study fail to qualify as programs that lead to gainful employment in a recognized occupation under those regulations, students attending those programs of study will be unable to receive funds from Title IV Programs to help pay their education costs. On June 13, 2011, the ED issued final regulations that were to become effective on July 1, 2012, specifying requirements related to a program of study that leads to gainful employment in a recognized occupation (the “GE Requirements”). On June 30, 2012, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia vacated all of the GE Requirements, except for those pertaining to certain institutional disclosures. We cannot assure you that all of the GE Requirements will not be reinstituted, whether through an appellate court decision that overturns the District Court’s ruling, the promulgation of new regulations by the ED or otherwise, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. Under the vacated GE Requirements, if any of our programs of study had failed to satisfy those requirements for three out of four federal fiscal years (“FFYs”), that program would have been deemed ineligible under Title IV Programs. Students cannot obtain financial aid under Title IV Programs to help pay their education costs associated with attending ineligible programs of study. A program of study would have satisfied the vacated GE Requirements, if:
The first FFY that a program of study was required to satisfy the vacated GE Requirements was FFY 2012 (i.e., October 1, 2011 through September 30, 2012). Under the vacated GE Requirements, a program of study offered by an institution was defined based on its credential level (e.g., diploma, associate degree, bachelor degree, master’s degree, etc.) and Classification of Institutional Program (“CIP”) code. Different programs of study offered by an institution that were at the same credential level and had the same CIP code were combined and treated as a single program under the vacated GE Requirements. Subject to certain adjustments, limitations and exclusions:
The median loan debt included FFEL and FDL program loans, private education loans and institutional financing received by those students for attendance in any program of study offered by the institution. The ED would have determined whether the annual loan payment for a program of study in a particular FFY was less than or equal to:
The Applicable Earnings were to be obtained by the ED from the Social Security Administration or another federal agency (collectively, the “SSA”). If a program’s graduates’ median annual loan payment as calculated by the ED using Applicable Earnings obtained from the SSA was greater than 30% of discretionary income and 12% of annual earnings, however, an institution could have demonstrated that the program satisfied the annual loan payment requirements by recalculating the discretionary income and annual earnings percentages using alternative earnings from:
- 29 -
Table of ContentsAn institution could have used BLS earnings data to recalculate the discretionary income and annual earnings percentages with respect to a program of study, only if the institution:
Depending on how the ED interpreted and applied the vacated GE Requirements, if any of our programs had failed the annual loan payment requirement using the Applicable Earnings from the SSA, we believe that the alternative BLS earnings may have provided us with an opportunity to demonstrate that the program satisfied the annual loan payment requirement for FFYs 2012, 2013 and 2014. If a program of study failed to satisfy the vacated GE Requirements for:
An institution could not seek to reestablish the eligibility of a program of study that became ineligible for failure to satisfy the vacated GE Requirements or establish the eligibility of a substantially similar program of study, until the end of the third FFY following the FFY that the program of study became ineligible. A program of study would have been substantially similar, if it had the same credential level and first four digits of the CIP code as that of the ineligible program. If an institution voluntarily discontinued a program of study that failed to satisfy the vacated GE Requirements for one or two consecutive FFYs, the institution could not seek to reestablish the eligibility of that program of study until the end of the second or third FFY following the FFY in which the institution notified the ED that the institution was relinquishing Title IV Program eligibility for that program of study, depending on when the institution provides such notice to the ED. There were many open questions and interpretive issues related to the GE Requirements before most were vacated, including questions as to the ability of institutions to obtain and verify the information needed to calculate the applicable metrics. In addition, the continuing eligibility of our programs of study under Title IV Programs were at risk under the vacated GE Requirements due to factors beyond our control, such as:
In addition, providing Debt Warnings to current and prospective students could have had an adverse impact on the level of interest and enrollment in those programs of study.
- 30 -
Table of ContentsWe cannot predict with certainty the impact that the vacated GE Requirements would have had on our operations. In response to the vacated GE Requirements, we made significant changes to the programs of study that we offer. The vacated GE Requirements also put downward pressure on tuition prices, to help prevent students from incurring debt that exceeded the levels required for a program to remain eligible under Title IV Programs. This could, in turn, increase the percentage of our revenue that is derived from Title IV Programs and, therefore, adversely impact our compliance with other ED regulations. We had also begun to limit enrollment in certain programs of study and substantially increased our efforts to promote student loan repayment. The continuation of any or all of these factors could reduce our enrollment and/or increase our cost of doing business, perhaps materially, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and stock price. Government and regulatory agencies and third parties may bring investigations, claims or actions against us based on alleged violations of the extensive regulatory requirements applicable to our campuses, which could require us to pay monetary damages, receive other sanctions and expend significant resources to defend those claims or actions. Due to the highly regulated nature of the postsecondary education industry, we are subject to investigations and claims of non-compliance with regulatory standards and other actions brought by regulatory agencies, students, shareholders and other parties. If the results of any of those investigations and claims are unfavorable to us, we may be required to pay money damages or be subject to fines, penalties, injunctions, operational limitations, loss of eligibility to participate in federal or state financial aid programs, debarments, additional oversight and reporting, or other civil and criminal sanctions. Those sanctions could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. Even if we satisfactorily resolve the issues raised by those types of claims, we may have to divert significant financial and management resources from our ongoing business operations to address and defend those claims, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. Adverse publicity regarding any of those claims could also negatively affect our business and the market proice of our common stock. On May 18, 2012, we received a Civil Investigative Demand (“CID”) from the U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”). The CID provides that the purpose of the investigation is, in part, “to determine whether for-profit post-secondary companies, student loan origination and servicing providers, or other unnamed persons have engaged or are engaging in unlawful acts or practices relating to the advertising, marketing, or origination of private student loans.” The CID contains broad requests for production of documents, answers to interrogatories and written reports related to private education loans made to our students and many other aspects of our business. We have provided documentation and other information to the CFPB, while preserving our rights to object to its inquiry. We believe that our acts and practices relating to private student loans are lawful.
The following table sets forth information regarding purchases made by us of shares of our common stock on a monthly basis in the three months ended June 30, 2012: Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
- 31 -
Table of ContentsThe terms of the Repurchase Program provide that we may repurchase shares of our common stock, from time to time depending on market conditions and other considerations, in the open market or through privately negotiated transactions in accordance with Rule 10b-18 of the Exchange Act. Unless earlier terminated by our Board of Directors, the Repurchase Program will expire when we repurchase all shares authorized for repurchase thereunder.
A list of exhibits required to be filed as part of this report is set forth in the Index to Exhibits, which immediately precedes the exhibits, and is incorporated herein by reference.
- 32 -
Table of ContentsSIGNATURES Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.
Table of ContentsINDEX TO EXHIBITS
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||