form10k.htm
U.S.
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON,
D.C. 20549
Form 10-K
x ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO
SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For
the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007
Commission File Number
000-51371
LINCOLN
EDUCATIONAL SERVICES CORPORATION
(Exact
name of registrant as specified in its charter)
|
New
Jersey
|
|
57-1150621
|
|
|
(State
or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)
|
|
(IRS
Employer Identification No.)
|
|
200
Executive Drive, Suite 340
West
Orange, NJ 07052
(Address
of principal executive offices)
(973) 736-9340
(Registrant’s
telephone number, including area code)
Securities
registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
None
Securities
registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
Common
Stock, no par value per share
Indicate
by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in
Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes ¨
No x
Indicate
by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to
Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes ¨ No x
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 o
Indicate
by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of
Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best
of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements
incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any
amendment to this Form 10-K. x
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
definition of “accelerated filer,” “large accelerated filer” and “smaller
reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
Large
accelerated filer ¨
|
Accelerated
filer x
|
Non-accelerated
filer ¨
|
Smaller
reporting company ¨
|
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in
Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes ¨ No x
The
aggregate market value of the 4,668,347 shares of common stock held by
non-affiliates of the Registrant issued and outstanding as of June 29,
2007, the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second
fiscal quarter was $69,371,636. This amount is based on the closing price of the
common stock on the Nasdaq Global Market of $14.86 per share on June 29,
2007. Shares of common stock held by executive officers and directors and
persons who own 5% or more of outstanding common stock have been excluded since
such persons may be deemed affiliates. This determination of affiliate status is
not a determination for any other purpose.
The
number of shares of Registrant’s common stock outstanding as of March 13, 2008
was 25,986,648.
Documents Incorporated by
Reference
Portions
of the Proxy Statement for the Registrant’s 2008 Annual Meeting of Stockholders
are incorporated by reference in Part III of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K. With the exception of those portions that are specifically
incorporated by reference in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, such Proxy
Statement shall not be deemed filed as part of this Report or incorporated by
reference herein.
LINCOLN
EDUCATIONAL SERVICES CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
INDEX
TO FORM 10-K
FOR
THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2007
PART
I.
|
|
|
1
|
ITEM
1.
|
|
|
1
|
ITEM
1A.
|
|
|
21
|
ITEM
1B.
|
|
|
30
|
ITEM
2.
|
|
|
31
|
ITEM
3.
|
|
|
32
|
ITEM
4.
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
|
|
PART II.
|
|
|
33
|
ITEM
5.
|
|
|
33
|
ITEM
6.
|
|
|
36
|
ITEM
7.
|
|
|
38
|
ITEM
7A.
|
|
|
52
|
ITEM
8
|
|
|
52
|
ITEM
9.
|
|
|
52
|
ITEM
9A.
|
|
|
53
|
ITEM
9B.
|
|
|
53
|
|
|
|
|
PART III.
|
|
|
54
|
ITEM
10.
|
|
|
54
|
ITEM
11.
|
|
|
54
|
ITEM
12.
|
|
|
54
|
ITEM
13.
|
|
|
54
|
ITEM
14.
|
|
|
54
|
|
|
|
|
PART IV.
|
|
|
55
|
ITEM
15.
|
|
|
55
|
Forward-Looking
Statements
This Form
10-K contains “forward-looking statements,” within the meaning of Section 21E of
the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, which include information
relating to future events, future financial performance, strategies,
expectations, competitive environment, regulation and availability of resources.
These forward-looking statements include, without limitation, statements
regarding: proposed new programs; expectations that regulatory developments or
other matters will not have a material adverse effect on our consolidated
financial position, results of operations or liquidity; statements concerning
projections, predictions, expectations, estimates or forecasts as to our
business, financial and operating results and future economic performance; and
statements of management’s goals and objectives and other similar expressions
concerning matters that are not historical facts. Words such as “may,” “should,”
“could,” “would,” “predicts,” “potential,” “continue,” “expects,” “anticipates,”
“future,” “intends,” “plans,” “believes,” “estimates,” and similar expressions,
as well as statements in future tense, identify forward-looking
statements.
Forward-looking
statements should not be read as a guarantee of future performance or results,
and will not necessarily be accurate indications of the times at, or by, which
such performance or results will be achieved. Forward-looking statements are
based on information available at the time those statements are made and/or
management’s good faith belief as of that time with respect to future events,
and are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual performance
or results to differ materially from those expressed in or suggested by the
forward-looking statements. Important factors that could cause such differences
include, but are not limited to:
·
|
actual or anticipated
fluctuations in our results of
operations;
|
·
|
our failure to comply with the
extensive regulatory framework applicable to our industry or our failure
to obtain timely regulatory approvals in connection with a change of
control of our company;
|
·
|
our success in updating and
expanding the content of existing programs and developing new programs in
a cost-effective manner or on a timely
basis;
|
·
|
risks associated with the opening
of new campuses;
|
·
|
risk associated with integration
of acquired schools;
|
·
|
our ability to continue to
execute our growth
strategies;
|
·
|
conditions and trends in our
industry;
|
·
|
general and economic conditions;
and
|
·
|
other factors discussed under the
headings “Business,” “Risk Factors” and “Management’s Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations.”
|
Except as
required under the federal securities laws and rules and regulations of the SEC,
we undertake no obligation to update or revise forward-looking statements to
reflect actual results, changes in assumptions or changes in other factors
affecting forward-looking information. We caution you not to unduly
rely on the forward-looking statements when evaluating the information presented
herein.
PART
I.
OVERVIEW
We are a
leading and diversified for-profit provider of career-oriented post-secondary
education as measured by total enrollment and number of graduates. We offer
recent high school graduates and working adults degree and diploma programs in
five principal areas of study: automotive technology, health sciences, skilled
trades, business and information technology and spa and culinary. For the year
ended December 31, 2007, our automotive technology program, our health
science program, our skilled trades program, our business and information
technology program and, our spa and culinary program accounted for approximately
39%, 30%, 15%, 7%, and 9%, respectively, of our average enrollment. We had
18,013 students enrolled as of December 31, 2007 and our average enrollment
for the year ended December 31, 2007 was 17,687 students, an increase of
1.7% from our average enrollment of 17,397 for the year ended December 31,
2006. For the year ended December 31, 2007, our revenues were
$327.8 million, which represents an increase of 5.5% from the year ended
December 31, 2006. Excluding our acquisition of New England Institute of
Technology at Palm Beach, Inc., or FLA, in May 2006, our revenues and average
enrollments would have increased by 3.2% and decreased by 0.4%, respectively,
compared to the year ended December 31, 2006. For the year ended
December 31, 2006, our revenues were $310.6 million, which represents
an 8.1% increase from the year ended December 31,
2005. Excluding our acquisition of Euphoria Institute of Beauty Arts
and Sciences, or Euphoria, in December 2005 and FLA in May 2006, our revenues
and average enrollments would have increased by 2.8% and decreased by 3.3%,
respectively, compared to the year ended December 31, 2005.
As of
December 31, 2007 we operated 34 campuses in 17 states. We operate our
campuses under the following five brand names: Lincoln Technical
Institute, Lincoln College of Technology, Nashville Auto-Diesel College (NADC),
Southwestern College and Euphoria Institute of Beauty Arts and
Sciences. In February 2007, we completed a re-branding initiative to
consolidate 26 of our schools under the Lincoln Technical Institute and Lincoln
College of Technology brand names, with the remaining schools continuing to
operate under their pre-existing names. Most of our campuses serve
major metropolitan markets and each typically offers courses in multiple
programs. Five of our campuses are destination schools, which attract
students from across the United States and, in some cases, from abroad. Our
other campuses primarily attract students from their local communities and
surrounding areas. All of our schools are nationally accredited and are eligible
to participate in federal financial aid programs by the U.S. Department of
Education, or DOE, and applicable state education agencies and accrediting
commissions which allow students to apply for and access federal student loans
as well as other forms of financial aid.
In May
2007, we announced a realignment pursuant to which we created separate
managerial oversight for two groups of educational programs:
|
·
|
Lincoln
Technical Group. The Lincoln Technical Group primarily focuses
on our largest automotive technology and skilled trades
programs.
|
|
·
|
Lincoln
Education Group. The Lincoln Education Group primarily focuses
on our health sciences, spa and culinary and business and information
technology programs, as well as our online
programs.
|
This
realignment is intended to promote efficiencies across our operations and
further enhance our ability to execute on our strategy.
On
January 11, 2005, we acquired the rights, title and interest in the assets
used in the conduct and operation of New England Technical Institute which was
re-branded as Lincoln Technical Institute (“NETI”), for approximately
$18.8 million, net of cash acquired. NETI operates four schools in New
Britain, Hamden, Shelton and Cromwell, Connecticut and provides programs in
automotive technology, health sciences, business and information technology,
skilled trades and spa and culinary. This acquisition expanded our presence in
the northeastern United States.
On
December 1, 2005, we acquired the rights, title and interest in the assets used
in the conduct and operation of Euphoria for approximately $9.2 million, net of
cash acquired. Euphoria operates two campuses, in Las Vegas and Henderson,
Nevada. Euphoria currently offers certificates programs in esthetics,
cosmetology and nail design.
On March
27, 2006, we opened our new automotive campus in Queens, New York.
On May
22, 2006, we acquired all of the outstanding common stock of FLA for
approximately $40.1 million. The purchase price was $32.9 million, net of cash
acquired plus the assumption of a mortgage note for $7.2 million. FLA operates
two campuses, serving approximately 1,000 students. FLA currently offers
associates and bachelor’s degrees in various areas including automotive, skilled
trade, health science, business and information technology, and spa and
culinary.
We
believe that we provide our students with the highest quality career-oriented
training available for our areas of study in our markets. We offer programs in
areas of study that we believe are typically underserved by traditional
providers of post-secondary education and for which we believe there exists
significant demand among students and employers. Furthermore, we believe our
convenient class scheduling, career focused curricula and emphasis on job
placement offer our students valuable advantages that have been neglected by the
traditional academic sector. By combining substantial hands-on training with
traditional classroom-based training led by experienced instructors, we believe
we offer our students a unique opportunity to develop practical job skills in
key areas of expected job demand. We believe these job skills enable our
students to compete effectively for employment opportunities and to pursue
on-going salary and career advancement.
Our
principal business is providing post-secondary education. Accordingly, our
operations aggregate into one reporting segment.
DISCONTINUED
OPERATIONS
On July
31, 2007, our Board of Directors approved a plan to cease operations at our
Plymouth Meeting, Pennsylvania, Norcross, Georgia and Henderson, Nevada
campuses. As a result of the above decision, we reviewed the related
goodwill and long-lived assets for possible impairment in accordance with SFAS
No. 142, “Goodwill and Other
Intangible Assets,” and SFAS No. 144, “Accounting for the Impairment or
Disposal of Long-Lived Assets.”
As of
September 30, 2007, all operations had ceased at these campuses and,
accordingly, the results of operations of these campuses have been reflected in
the accompanying statements of operations as “Discontinued Operations” for all
periods presented.
The results of operations
at these three campuses for each of the three year period ended December
31, 2007 were comprised of the following (in thousands):
|
|
Year
Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
Revenue
|
|
$ |
4,230 |
|
|
$ |
10,876 |
|
|
$ |
11,853 |
|
Operating
expenses
|
|
|
(13,760 |
) |
|
|
(13,493 |
) |
|
|
(14,432 |
) |
|
|
|
(9,530 |
) |
|
|
(2,617 |
) |
|
|
(2,579 |
) |
Benefit
for income taxes
|
|
|
(4,043 |
) |
|
|
(1,085 |
) |
|
|
(1,004 |
) |
Loss
from discontinued operations
|
|
$ |
(5,487 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,532 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,575 |
) |
AVAILABLE
INFORMATION
Our
website is www.lincolnedu.com. We make
available on this website our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly
reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, annual proxy statement
on Schedule 14A and amendments to those reports as soon as reasonably
practicable after we electronically file or furnish such materials to the
Securities and Exchange Commission. You can access this information on our
website, free of charge, by clicking on “Investor Relations.” The information
contained on or connected to our website is not a part of this annual report on
Form 10-K.
BUSINESS
STRATEGY
Our goal
is to strengthen our role as a leading and diversified provider of
career-oriented post-secondary education by continuing to pursue the
following:
Maximize
Utilization of Existing Facilities. We
believe that by creating separate oversight for two groups of educational
programs, we will be able to improve the day-to-day management, operational
efficiency and capacity utilization of our campuses. We are also
focused on improving capacity utilization through increased enrollments, and we
expect to continue investing in marketing resources to attract new
students.
Expand Existing
Areas of Study and Existing Facilities. We believe we can
leverage our existing operations to capitalize on demand from students and
employers in our local markets. We are adding new programs and degree offerings
in our current areas of study and are expanding several of our campus
facilities.
Expand Existing
Areas of Study. We are expanding our program offerings in our existing
areas of study by replicating existing programs in new locations and increasing
our degree offerings.
In 2006
we opened our expanded Grand Prairie campus and added collision repair to its
existing offerings of automotive and diesel technology. In 2007 we
completed construction of the Center for Culinary Arts at our
Columbia, Maryland facility and our first class started in the third
quarter. Similarly, we added a Euphoria cosmetology program to our
Lincoln, Rhode Island campus and classes began in the third
quarter. Throughout 2007 we also expanded our criminal justice
program, which we introduced in 2006, into five additional campuses. Finally, we
were able to accelerate the expansion of our practical nursing program into New
Jersey by acquiring a troubled program which we improved and subsequently
received approval to expand to two other locations within the
state. Today we have three campuses offering practical nursing in New
Jersey. In total for 2008, we expect to replicate at least eight existing
programs across six different campuses.
We are
also continuing to expand our associate degree offerings. We currently offer
associate degrees at 16 of our campuses bringing the total enrollment in
associate degree programs to approximately 21.4% and 16.5% of our enrolled
students as of December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively. In 2008 we expect to
receive approval to offer degrees at our Grand Prairie, Texas
campus. In 2006, we acquired our first bachelor’s degree program in
culinary arts, and we will launch in 2008 at least five internally developed
bachelor degree programs.
Expand Existing
Facilities. We are expanding our existing facilities and relocating other
schools to expand capacity. In October 2005, we acquired an additional 100,000
square foot facility in Grand Prairie, Texas, which combined with our existing
facility, tripled the size of the original 50,000 square foot facility. We
opened this new facility in the second quarter of 2006 and combined with the
existing school will be able to serve approximately 2,200 students. Also in
Grand Prairie, we completely renovated our former auto school and converted it
to a skilled trade school which will open in the first quarter of
2008. With the additional space we will be able to add electrician
and welding programs to our existing HVAC program. This additional
space will allow us to grow our student population and further diversify our
product offerings to obtain greater penetration in a large existing
market. Also in 2007 we enlarged two Southwestern College
facilities, Tri County and Dayton in order to accommodate the increased
demand in those markets. In 2008 we will open an expanded Brockton
campus which will allow us to expand that school’s offerings from two programs
to four. Operationally, these new facilities are more efficient to manage and
will accommodate increased enrollments and programs.
Expand Existing
Geographic Markets. In certain markets we believe that we can leverage
our marketing and advertising dollars by opening additional campuses and
obtaining greater market penetration. One example of this strategy is
our expansion in the New York metropolitan area with the opening of our Queens,
NY automotive school in partnership with the Greater New York Area Automobile
Dealers Association. We opened the school on March 27,
2006. In 2008 we will be expanding our presence in Las Vegas with the
opening of the our Euphoria campus in the north end of Las Vegas which will
enable us to better serve this fast growing city.
Enter New
Geographic Markets and New Areas of Study. We
believe we can increase our student enrollments by entering selected new
geographic markets and new areas of study. We target new markets and areas of
study that we believe have significant growth potential and where we can
leverage our reputation and operating expertise. We expect that our entrance
into new geographic markets and areas of study will increase our diversification
and potential for future program expansion.
Enter New
Geographic Markets. We continually search for entry into markets where we
can start new schools. In May 2006 we entered the Florida market with the
acquisition of FLA . This acquisition provides a presence within one
of the largest states as well as an opportunity to more easily market to the
Caribbean market. In 2008 we expect to open a campus in one new
market.
Enter New
Areas of Study. We continually search for new, high-growth areas of study
that are in demand by students and employers. We typically require six to
18 months to develop new programs and to obtain necessary regulatory
approvals. In 2006, we launched Criminal Justice programs both on
ground and online and in 2007 we rolled it out to additional
campuses. Similarly we have created a new Network Communication and
Information Systems program that we launched in several schools in the fourth
quarter of 2007 and will expand to an additional eight schools in the first half
of 2008. Also, our research indicates that there is a strong demand
for skilled trades professionals, especially in the industrial and commercial
sector. Consequently we developed our first welding program which
will launch in the first quarter of 2008. We expect to roll these
programs out to additional campuses over time.
We are
developing several other new programs in the health sciences, business and
information technology and skilled trades, and some of these programs are
expected to be approved for offering in 2008.
Opportunistically
Pursue Strategic Acquisitions. We continue to
evaluate attractive acquisition candidates. In evaluating potential
acquisitions, we seek to identify schools with the potential for program
replication at our existing campuses, new areas of study, new markets with
attractive growth opportunities and advanced degree programs. We also look for
schools whose operations we can improve by leveraging our sales and marketing
expertise, business management systems and our experienced management
team.
Introduce Online
Education Alternatives. We recently launched our
online initiative to capitalize on the rapidly growing demand for, and
flexibility provided by, online education alternatives. Initially, we were
offering some of our diploma graduates the opportunity to earn their associate
degree online and in June 2006 we launched our first 100% online program. In
December 2006, we launched our second 100% online program. In 2007 we launched
five programs in information technology, or IT, and ten degree completer
programs which will enable diploma students in a range of programs from
automotive to culinary to obtain an associates degree. In 2008 we
expect to launch five associate and bachelor business programs. We believe that
our online initiatives will broaden our addressable market and be an attractive
option for students without the geographic or financial flexibility to enroll in
campus-based programs.
PROGRAMS AND AREAS OF
STUDY
We
structure our program offerings to provide our students with a practical,
career-oriented education and position them for attractive entry-level job
opportunities in their chosen fields. Our programs are designed to be completed
in 14 to 105 weeks. Tuition for programs ranges from $8,800 to $34,900,
depending on the length of the program and the area of study. All of our schools
offer diploma and certificate programs, 16 of our schools are currently approved
to offer associate degree programs and one school is approved to offer a
bachelor’s degree program. In order to accommodate the schedules of our students
and maximize classroom utilization, we typically offer courses five days a week
in three shifts a day and start new classes every month. Also for those students
who do not live near one of our campuses or whose schedules prevent them from
attending school we offer several programs online. We update and
expand our programs frequently to reflect the latest technological advances in
the field, providing our students with the specific skills and knowledge
required in the current marketplace. Classroom instruction combines lectures and
demonstrations by our experienced faculty with comprehensive hands-on laboratory
exercises in simulated workplace environments.
The following table lists the programs
offered as of December 31, 2007 and the average number of students enrolled
in each area of study for the year ended December 31,
2007:
Program
Offered
|
|
Area
of Study
|
|
Bachelor
|
|
Associate
|
|
Diploma
or Certificate
|
|
Average
Enrollment
|
|
|
Percent
of Total Enrollment
|
|
Automotive
Technology
|
|
- |
|
Auto
Service Management, Collision Repair, Diesel Technology, Diesel &
Truck Service Management
|
|
Automotive
Mechanics, Automotive Technology, Collision Repair, Diesel Truck
Mechanics, Diesel Technology, Diesel & Truck Technology, Master
Automotive Technology
|
|
|
6,840 |
|
|
|
39 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Health
Sciences
|
|
- |
|
Medical
Assisting Technology, Medical Administrative Assistant Technology, Dental
Office Management
|
|
Medical
Administrative Assisting, Medical Assisting, Pharmacy Technology, Medical
Billing and Coding, Dental Assisting, Licensed Practical
Nurse
|
|
|
5,386 |
|
|
|
30 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Skilled
Trades
|
|
- |
|
Mechanical
/ Architectural Drafting, Electronics Engineering Technology,
HVAC
|
|
Electronic
Servicing, Electronics Engineering Technology, Electronics System
Technology, HVAC, Mechanical / Architectural Drafting,
Electrician
|
|
|
2,591 |
|
|
|
15 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Spa
and Culinary
|
|
Culinary
Management
|
|
Culinary
Arts, Cosmetology Management, Food and Beverage, Baking and Pastry,
Culinary Management
|
|
Culinary
Arts, Baking & Pastry, Cosmetology, Esthetics, Nail Technician,
Therapeutic, Massage & Body Technology
|
|
|
1,640 |
|
|
|
9 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Business
and Information Technology
|
|
- |
|
PC
Systems & Networking Technology, Network Systems Administration,
Business Administration, Criminal Justice
|
|
Business
Administration, Network Systems Administrating, PC Support Technology,
Criminal Justice
|
|
|
1,230 |
|
|
|
7 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total:
|
|
|
|
|
17,687 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
Automotive
Technology. Automotive technology represents our
largest area of study, with 39% of our average student enrollments for the year
ended December 31, 2007. Our automotive technology programs are 38 to 92
weeks in length, with tuition rates of $10,000 to $34,900. We believe we are a
leading provider of automotive technology education in each of our local
markets. Graduates of our programs are qualified to obtain entry level
employment ranging from positions as technicians and mechanics to various
apprentice level positions. Our graduates are employed by a wide variety of
employers, ranging from automotive and diesel dealers, independent auto body
paint and repair shops, to trucking and construction companies.
We have
an arrangement with BMW that offers our automotive technology students the
opportunity to work for BMW through the Service Technician Education Program
(STEP). The STEP program is a "graduate" school program for individuals who have
successfully earned an automotive certification either at one of our schools or
any of our competitor's schools. Students who are admitted to the STEP program
have their tuition paid by BMW and upon successfully completing the program are
typically employed as BMW mechanics. The BMW STEP program commenced at our
Columbia, Maryland facility in 2004. Our arrangement with BMW signifies our high
quality education capabilities and is an attractive marketing
program.
Each of
our Lincoln Technical Institute schools, with the exception of our Allentown,
Pennsylvania campus, offer programs in automotive technology in addition to
other technical programs. Lincoln College of Technology (formerly
Denver Automotive & Diesel College) (“Denver LCT”) and
Nashville Auto-Diesel College currently offer programs exclusively in
automotive technology. Denver LCT, Nashville Auto-Diesel College, Grand Prairie,
Texas Lincoln Technical Institute and our Indianapolis,
Indiana Lincoln College of Technology schools are destination schools,
attracting students from throughout the United States and, in some cases, from
abroad.
Health
Sciences. For the year ended December 31,
2007, health sciences represented our second largest area of study, representing
30% of our total average enrollments. Our health science programs are 30 to 92
weeks in length, with tuition rates of $10,900 to $30,700. Graduates of our
programs are qualified to obtain positions such as licensed practical nurse,
medical administrative assistant, EKG technician, claims examiner and pharmacy
technician. Our graduates are employed by a wide variety of employers, including
hospitals, laboratories, insurance companies, doctors' offices and pharmacies.
Our medical assistant and medical administrative assistant programs are our
largest health science programs.
We offer
health science programs at 21 schools, including five Southwestern Colleges
and 16 Lincoln College of Technology and Lincoln Technical Institute
schools.
Skilled
Trades. For the year ended December 31, 2007,
15% of our average student enrollments were in our skilled trades programs. Our
skilled trades programs are 30 to 91 weeks in length, with tuition rates of
$15,300 to $28,500. Our skilled trades programs include electrician, heating,
ventilation and air conditioning repair, drafting and computer-aided design and
electronic system technician. Graduates of our programs are qualified to obtain
entry level employment positions such as electrician, cable, wiring and HVAC
installer and servicer and drafting technician. Our graduates are employed by a
wide variety of employers, including residential and commercial construction,
telecommunications installation companies and architectural firms.
We have
introduced our electronic system technician program to seven campuses and plan
to expand it to additional campuses. Students in these programs are trained to
install and service equipment such as alarm systems, cable infrastructure, home
entertainment systems, fiber-optic wiring in homes and offices, and satellite
and telecommunication systems.
In 2007
we developed our first welding program, which we will launch in the first
quarter of 2008. This program was developed based on the National
Center for Construction Education and Research (NCCER) curriculum. NCCER
is a not-for-profit education foundation created to help address the critical
workforce shortage facing the construction industry and to develop
industry-driven standardized craft training programs with portable
credentials.
We offer
skilled trades programs at 13 of our 25 Lincoln Technical Institute and Lincoln
College of Technology campuses.
Spa and
Culinary. For the year ended December 31,
2007, 9% of our average student enrollments were in our spa and culinary
programs. Our spa and culinary programs are 14 to 97 weeks in length, with
tuition rates of $8,800 to $27,300. Our spa programs include
therapeutic massage, cosmetology and esthetics. Graduates work in
salons, spas, cruise ships or for themselves. We offer massage
programs at 14 campuses and cosmetology programs at six campuses. Our
culinary graduates are employed by restaurants, hotels, cruise ships and
bakeries. We offer culinary programs at the Florida Culinary
Institute and three Centers for Culinary Arts.
Business and
Information Technology. For the year ended
December 31, 2007, 7% of our average student enrollments were in our
business and information technology programs, which include our diploma and
degree criminal justice programs. Our business and information technology
programs are 30 to 96 weeks in length, with tuition rates of $12,000 to $27,165.
We have focused our current IT program offerings on those that are most in
demand, such as our PC systems technician, network systems administrator and
business administration specialist programs. Our IT and business
graduates work in entry level positions for both small and large
corporations. Our criminal justice graduates work in the security
industry and for various government agencies and departments. We
offer these programs at 15 of our campuses.
MARKETING AND STUDENT
RECRUITMENT
We
utilize a variety of marketing and recruiting methods to attract students and
increase enrollments. Our marketing and recruiting efforts are targeted at
potential students who are entering the workforce, or who are underemployed or
unemployed and require additional training to enter or re-enter the
workforce.
Marketing. Our
marketing program utilizes media advertising such as television, the Internet,
and various print media and is enhanced by referrals. We continuously monitor
and adjust the focus of our marketing efforts to maximize efficiency and
minimize our student acquisition costs.
Media. Our
media advertising is directed primarily at attracting students from the local
areas in which our schools operate. Television advertising, which is coordinated
by a national buyer, is our most successful medium. Systems we have developed
enable us to closely monitor and track the effectiveness of each advertisement
on a daily or weekly basis and make adjustments accordingly. The Internet is our
second most successful medium and its effectiveness is continuously increasing.
We also advertise via direct mail, in telephone directories and in
newspapers.
Referrals. Referrals
from current students, high school counselors and satisfied graduates and their
employers have historically represented over 20% of our new enrollments. Our
school administrators actively work with our current students to encourage them
to recommend our programs to potential students. We continue to build strong
relationships with high school guidance counselors and instructors by offering
annual seminars at our training facilities to further educate these individuals
on the strengths of our programs. Graduates who have gone on to enjoy success in
the workforce frequently recommend our programs, as do local business owners who
are pleased with the performance of our graduates whom they have
hired.
Recruiting. Our
recruiting efforts are conducted by a group of approximately 403 field- and
campus-based representatives who meet directly with potential students during
presentations conducted at high schools, in the potential student's home or
during a visit to one of our campuses.
Field-Based
Recruiting. Our
field-based recruiting representatives make presentations at high schools to
attract students to both our local and destination campuses. Our field-based
representatives also visit directly with potential students in their homes.
During 2007, we have recruited approximately 22% of our students directly out of
high school.
Campus-Recruiting. When
a potential student is identified through our marketing and recruiting efforts,
one of our representatives is paired with the potential student to follow up on
an individual basis. Our media advertisements contain a unique toll-free number
and our telephone system automatically directs the call to the campus nearest
the caller. At this point, a recruiting representative will respond to the
inquiry, typically within 24 hours. The representatives are trained to explain
in detail the opportunities available within each program and schedule an
appointment for the potential student to visit the school and tour the school's
facilities.
STUDENT ADMISSIONS,
ENROLLMENT AND RETENTION
Admissions. In
order to attend our schools, students must complete an application and pass an
entry examination. While each of our programs has different admissions criteria,
we screen all applications and counsel the students on the most appropriate
program to increase the likelihood that our students complete the requisite
coursework and obtain and sustain employment following graduation.
Enrollment. We
enroll students continuously throughout the year, with our largest classes
enrolling in late summer or early fall following high school graduation. We had
18,013 students enrolled as of December 31, 2007 and our average enrollment
for the year ended December 31, 2007 was 17,687 students, an increase of
1.7% from December 31, 2006. Excluding our acquisition of FLA in
May 2006, our average enrollments would have decreased by 0.4%. Our average
enrollment for the year ended December 31, 2006 was 17,397 students, an
increase of 2.0% from December 31, 2005. Excluding our
acquisition of Euphoria in December 2005 and FLA in May 2006, our average
enrollments would have decreased by 3.3%.
Retention. To
maximize student retention, the staff at each school is trained to recognize the
early warning signs of a potential drop and to assist and advise students on
academic, financial, employment and personal matters. We monitor our retention
rates by instructor, course, program and school. When we notice that a
particular instructor or program is experiencing a higher than normal dropout
rate, we quickly seek to determine the cause of the problem and attempt to
correct it. When we notice that a student is having trouble academically, we
offer tutoring.
JOB
PLACEMENT
We
believe that securing employment for our graduates is critical to our ability to
attract high quality students. In addition, high job placement rates result in
low student loan default rates, an important requirement for continued
participation in Title IV Programs. See "Regulatory Environment—Regulation of
Federal Student Financial Aid Programs." Accordingly, we dedicate significant
resources to maintaining an effective graduate placement program. Our
non-destination schools work closely with local employers to ensure that we are
training students with skills that employers want. Each school has an advisory
council made up of local employers who provide us with direct feedback on how
well we are preparing our students to succeed in the workplace. This enables us
to tailor our programs to the market. For example, part of a student's grade is
dependent upon attendance and appearance because employers want their employees
to be punctual and to have a professional appearance. The placement staff in
each of our destination schools maintains databases of potential employers
throughout the country, allowing us to place students in their career field upon
graduation. We also have internship programs that provide our students with
opportunities to work with employers prior to graduation. For example, some of
the students in our automotive programs have the opportunity to complete a
portion of their hands-on training while working with a potential employer. In
addition, some of our allied health students are required to participate in an
internship program during which they work in the field as part of their career
training. Students that participate in these programs often go on to work for
the same business upon graduation. We also assist students with resume writing,
interviewing and other job search skills.
FACULTY AND
EMPLOYEES
We hire
our faculty in accordance with established criteria, including relevant work
experience, educational background and accreditation and state regulatory
standards. We require meaningful industry experience of our teaching staff in
order to maintain the quality of instruction in all of our programs and to
address current and industry-specific issues in our course content. In addition,
we provide intensive instructional training and continuing education, including
quarterly instructional development seminars, annual reviews, technical upgrade
training, faculty development plans and weekly staff meetings.
The staff
of each school typically includes a school director, a director of graduate
placement, an education director, a director of student services, a
financial-aid director, an accounting manager, a director of admissions and
instructors, all of whom are industry professionals with experience in our areas
of study.
As of
December 31, 2007, we had approximately 2,671 employees, including 648
full-time faculty and 348 part-time instructors. At six of our
campuses, the teaching professionals are represented by unions. These employees
are covered by collective bargaining agreements that expire between 2008 through
2012. We believe that we generally have good relationships with these unions and
our employees.
COMPETITION
The
for-profit, post-secondary education industry is highly competitive and highly
fragmented, with no one provider controlling significant market share. Direct
competition between career-oriented schools and traditional four-year colleges
or universities is limited. Thus, our main competitors are other for-profit,
career-oriented schools, as well as public and private two-year junior and
community colleges. Competition is generally based on location, the type of
programs offered, the quality of instruction, placement rates, reputation,
recruiting and tuition rates. Public institutions are generally able to charge
lower tuition than our schools, due in part to government subsidies and other
financial sources not available to for-profit schools. In addition, some of our
private competitors have a more extended or dense network of schools and
campuses than we do, which enables them to recruit students more efficiently
from a wider geographic area. Nevertheless, we believe that we are able to
compete effectively in our local markets because of the diversity of our program
offerings, quality of instruction, the strength of our brands, our reputation
and our success in placing students with employers.
We
compete with other institutions that are eligible to receive Title IV funding.
This includes four-year, not-for-profit public and private colleges and
universities, community colleges and all for-profit institutions whether they
are four years, two years or less. Our competition differs in each
market depending on the curriculum that we offer. For example, a school offering
automotive, allied health and skilled trades programs will have a different
group of competitors than a school offering allied health, business/IT and
skilled trades. Also, because schools can add new programs within six to
twelve months, new competitors can emerge relatively quickly. Moreover,
with the introduction of online learning, the number of competitors in each
market has increased because students can now stay local but learn from a
non-local institution.
Notwithstanding
the above, today we mainly compete with community colleges and other career
schools, both for-profit and not-for-profit. We focus on programs that are in
high demand. We compete against community colleges by seeking to offer more
frequent start dates, more flexible hours, better instructional resources, more
hands on training, shorter program length and greater assistance with job
placement. We compete against the other career schools by seeking to offer a
higher quality of education, higher quality instructional equipment and a better
overall value. On average, each of our schools has at least three direct
competitors and at least a dozen indirect competitors. As we continue to add
courses and degree programs, our competitors within a given market increases and
thus we face increased competition.
ENVIRONMENTAL
MATTERS
We use
hazardous materials at our training facilities and campuses, and generate small
quantities of waste such as used oil, antifreeze, paint and car batteries. As a
result, our facilities and operations are subject to a variety of environmental
laws and regulations governing, among other things, the use, storage and
disposal of solid and hazardous substances and waste, and the clean-up of
contamination at our facilities or off-site locations to which we send or have
sent waste for disposal. We are also required to obtain permits for our air
emissions, and to meet operational and maintenance requirements. In the event we
do not maintain compliance with any of these laws and regulations, or are
responsible for a spill or release of hazardous materials, we could incur
significant costs for clean-up, damages, and fines or penalties.
REGULATORY
ENVIRONMENT
Students
attending our schools finance their education through a combination of
individual resources, family contributions, private loans and federal financial
aid programs. Each of our schools participates in the federal programs of
student financial aid authorized under the Title IV Programs, which are
administered by the DOE. For the year ended December 31, 2007,
approximately 80% (calculated based on cash receipts) of our revenues were
derived from the Title IV Programs. Students obtain access to federal
student financial aid through a DOE prescribed application and eligibility
certification process. Student financial aid funds are generally made available
to students at prescribed intervals throughout their predetermined expected
length of study. Students typically use the funds received from the federal
financial aid programs to pay their tuition and fees. The transfer of funds from
the financial aid programs are to the student, who then applies those funds to
the cost of his or her education.
In
connection with the students' receipt of federal financial aid, our schools are
subject to extensive regulation by governmental agencies and licensing and
accrediting bodies. In particular, the Title IV Programs, and the
regulations issued thereafter by the DOE, subject us to significant regulatory
scrutiny in the form of numerous standards that each of our schools must satisfy
in order to participate in the various federal student financial aid programs.
To participate in the Title IV Programs, a school must be authorized to
offer its programs of instruction by the applicable state education agencies in
the states in which it is physically located, be accredited by an accrediting
commission recognized by the DOE and be certified as an eligible institution by
the DOE. The DOE defines an eligible institution to consist of both a main
campus and its additional locations, if any. Each of our schools is either a
main campus or an additional location of a main campus. Each of our schools is
subject to extensive regulatory requirements imposed by state education
agencies, accrediting commissions, and the DOE. Our schools also participate in
other federal and state financial aid programs that assist students in paying
the cost of their education.
State
Authorization
Each of
our schools must be authorized by the applicable education agencies in the
states in which the school is physically located, and in some cases other
states, in order to operate and to grant degrees, diplomas or certificates to
its students. Some states have sought to assert jurisdiction over online
educational institutions that offer educational services to residents in the
state, notwithstanding the lack of a physical location in that
state. State agency authorization is also required in each state in
which a school is physically located in order for the school to become and
remain eligible to participate in Title IV Programs. If we are
found not to be in compliance with the applicable state regulation and a state
seeks to restrict one or more of our business activities within its boundaries,
we may not be able to recruit or enroll students in that state and may have to
stop providing services in that state, which could have a material adverse
effect on our business and results of operations. Currently, each of
our schools is authorized by the applicable state education agencies in the
states in which the school is physically located and in which it recruits
students.
Our
schools are subject to extensive, ongoing regulation by each of these states.
State laws typically establish standards for instruction, curriculum,
qualifications of faculty, location and nature of facilities and equipment,
administrative procedures, marketing, recruiting, financial operations, student
outcomes and other operational matters. State laws and regulations may limit our
ability to offer educational programs and to award degrees, diplomas or
certificates. Some states prescribe standards of financial responsibility that
are different from, and in certain cases more stringent than, those prescribed
by the DOE. Some states require schools to post a surety bond. Currently, we
have posted surety bonds on behalf of our schools and education representatives
with multiple states in a total amount of approximately $14.0 million.
These bonds are backed by $2.4 million of letters of credit.
If any of
our schools fail to comply with state licensing requirements, they are subject
to the loss of state licensure or authorization. If any one of our schools lost
its authorization from the education agency of the state in which the school is
located, that school and its related main campus and/or additional locations
would lose its eligibility to participate in Title IV Programs, be unable
to offer its programs and we could be forced to close that school. If one of our
schools lost its state authorization from a state other than the state in which
the school is located, the school would not be able to recruit students in that
state. We believe that each of our schools is in substantial compliance with the
applicable education agency requirements in each state in which it is physically
located.
Due to
state budget constraints in certain states in which we operate, it is possible
that those states may reduce the number of employees in, or curtail the
operations of, the state education agencies that authorize our schools. A delay
or refusal by any state education agency in approving any changes in our
operations that require state approval could prevent us from making such changes
or could delay our ability to make such changes.
Accreditation
Accreditation
is a non-governmental process through which a school submits to ongoing
qualitative and quantitative review by an organization of peer institutions.
Accrediting commissions primarily examine the academic quality of the school's
instructional programs, and a grant of accreditation is generally viewed as
confirmation that the school's programs meet generally accepted academic
standards. Accrediting commissions also review the administrative and financial
operations of the schools they accredit to ensure that each school has the
resources necessary to perform its educational mission.
Accreditation
by an accrediting commission recognized by the DOE is required for an
institution to be certified to participate in Title IV Programs. In order
to be recognized by the DOE, accrediting commissions must adopt specific
standards for their review of educational institutions. Fifteen of our campuses
are accredited by the Accrediting Commission of Career Schools and Colleges of
Technology or ACCSCT, and eighteen of our campuses are accredited by the
Accrediting Council for Independent Colleges and Schools, or ACICS. Both of
these accrediting commissions are recognized by the DOE. The following is a list
of the dates on which each campus was accredited by its accrediting commission
and the date by which its accreditation must be renewed.
Accrediting
Commission of Career Schools and Colleges of Technology Reaccreditation
Dates
School
|
|
Last
Accreditation Letter
|
|
Next
Accreditation
|
Philadelphia,
PA
|
|
December 4,
2003
|
|
May 1,
2008
|
Union,
NJ
|
|
June 4,
2004
|
|
February 1,
2009
|
Mahwah,
NJ*
|
|
December
9, 2004
|
|
August 1,
2009
|
Melrose
Park, IL
|
|
March
11, 2005
|
|
November 1,
2009
|
Denver,
CO
|
|
September
8, 2006
|
|
February 1,
2011
|
Columbia,
MD
|
|
March 13,
2007
|
|
February 1,
2012
|
Grand
Prairie, TX
|
|
May 29,
2007
|
|
August 1,
2011
|
Allentown,
PA
|
|
January
1, 2007
|
|
January 1,
2012
|
Nashville,
TN
|
|
May
1, 2007
|
|
May 1,
2012
|
Indianapolis,
IN
|
|
December 9,
2002
|
|
November 1,
2007***
|
New
Britain, CT
|
|
June
6, 2003
|
|
December 31,
2008
|
Shelton,
CT**
|
|
September 3,
2005
|
|
September 1,
2008
|
Cromwell,
CT**
|
|
November 22,
2006
|
|
November 1,
2011
|
Hamden,
CT**
|
|
July
1, 2007
|
|
July 1,
2012
|
Mt.
Laurel, NJ**
|
|
May
1, 2007
|
|
May 1,
2009
|
Queens,
NY*
|
|
June
30, 2006
|
|
June 30,
2008
|
*
|
Branch campus of main campus in
Union, NJ
|
**
|
Branch campus of main campus in
New
Britain,
CT
|
***
|
Currently going through
re-accreditation
|
Accrediting
Council for Independent Colleges and Schools Reaccreditation
Dates
School
|
|
Last
Accreditation Letter
|
|
Next
Accreditation
|
Brockton,
MA****
|
|
April 14,
2005
|
|
December 31,
2008
|
Lincoln,
RI
|
|
April 14,
2005
|
|
December 31,
2008
|
Lowell,
MA**
|
|
December 7,
2004
|
|
December 31,
2008
|
Somerville,
MA
|
|
December 7,
2004
|
|
December 31,
2008
|
Philadelphia
(Center City), PA*
|
|
April 23,
2007
|
|
December 31,
2012
|
Edison,
NJ
|
|
April 23,
2007
|
|
December 31,
2012
|
Marietta,
GA****
|
|
April 14,
2005
|
|
December 31,
2008
|
Mt.
Laurel, NJ*
|
|
April 23,
2007
|
|
December 31,
2012
|
Paramus,
NJ*
|
|
April 23,
2007
|
|
December 31,
2012
|
Philadelphia
(Northeast), PA*
|
|
April 23,
2007
|
|
December 31,
2012
|
Dayton,
OH
|
|
April 14,
2006
|
|
December 31,
2009
|
Cincinnati
(Vine Street), OH***
|
|
April 14,
2006
|
|
December 31,
2009
|
Cincinnati
(Northland Blvd.), OH***
|
|
April 14,
2006
|
|
December 31,
2009
|
Franklin,
OH***
|
|
April 14,
2006
|
|
December 31,
2009
|
Florence,
KY***
|
|
April 14,
2006
|
|
December 31,
2009
|
West
Palm Beach, FL
|
|
December
11, 2006
|
|
December
31, 2008
|
Summerlin,
NV
|
|
April
18, 2007
|
|
December
31, 2008
|
Green
Valley, NV
|
|
April
18, 2007
|
|
December
31, 2008
|
*
|
Branch campus of main campus in
Edison, NJ
|
**
|
Branch campus of main campus in
Somerville, MA
|
***
|
Branch campus of main campus in
Dayton, OH
|
****
|
Branch campus of main campus in
Lincoln, RI
|
If one of
our schools fails to comply with accrediting commission requirements, the
institution and its main and/or branch campuses are subject to the loss of
accreditation. If any one of our schools lost its accreditation, students
attending that school would no longer be eligible to receive Title IV
Program funding, and we could be forced to close that school. Our Cincinnati
(Vine Street), OH, campus is currently required to submit retention data to the
ACICS. Any institution required to submit retention data to the ACICS is
required to obtain prior permission from the ACICS for the initiation of any new
program and new branch campus or learning site.
Nature
of Federal and State Support for Post-Secondary Education
The
federal government provides a substantial part of the support for post-secondary
education through Title IV Programs, in the form of grants and loans to
students who can use those funds at any institution that has been certified as
eligible by the DOE. Most aid under Title IV Programs is awarded on the
basis of financial need, generally defined as the difference between the cost of
attending the institution and the expected amount a student and his or her
family can reasonably contribute to that cost. All recipients of Title IV
Program funds must maintain a satisfactory grade point average and progress in a
timely manner toward completion of their program of study. In addition, each
school must ensure that Title IV Program funds are properly accounted for
and disbursed in the correct amounts to eligible students.
Students
at our schools receive grants and loans to fund their education under the
following Title IV Programs: (1) the Federal Family Education Loan
program, (2) the Federal Pell Grant, or Pell, program, (3) the Federal
Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grant program, and (4) the Federal
Perkins Loan, or Perkins, program.
Federal Family
Education Loan. Under the Federal Family Education
Loan program, banks and other lending institutions make loans to students or
their parents. If a student or parent defaults on a loan, payment is guaranteed
by a federally recognized guaranty agency, which is then reimbursed by the DOE.
Students with financial need qualify for interest subsidies while in school and
during grace periods. For the year ended December 31, 2007, we derived
approximately 60% of our Title IV revenues (calculated based on cash
receipts) from the Federal Family Education Loan program.
Pell. Under
the Pell program, the DOE makes grants to students who demonstrate the greatest
financial need. For the year ended December 31, 2007, we derived
approximately 17% of our revenues (calculated based on cash receipts) from the
Pell program.
Federal
Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grant. Under
the Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grant program, the DOE issues
grants which are designed to supplement Pell grants for students with the
greatest financial needs. An institution is required to make a 25% matching
contribution for all funds received from the DOE under this program. For the
year ended December 31, 2007, we received less than 1% of our revenues
(calculated based on cash receipts) from the Federal Supplemental Educational
Opportunity Grant program.
Perkins. Perkins
loans are made from a revolving institutional account, 75% of which is
capitalized by the DOE and the remainder by the institution. Each institution is
responsible for collecting payments on Perkins loans from its former students
and lending those funds to currently enrolled students. Defaults by students on
their Perkins loans reduce the amount of funds available in the applicable
school's revolving account to make loans to additional students, but the school
does not have any obligation to guarantee the loans or repay the defaulted
amounts. For the year ended December 31, 2007, we derived less than 1% of
our revenues (calculated based on cash receipts) from the Perkins
program.
Other
Financial Assistance Programs
Some of
our students receive financial aid from federal sources other than Title IV
Programs, such as the programs administered by the U.S. Department of Veterans
Affairs and programs administered under the Workforce Investment Act. In
addition, many states also provide financial aid to our students in the form of
grants, loans or scholarships. The eligibility requirements for state financial
aid and these other federal aid programs vary among the funding agencies and by
program. Several states that provide financial aid to our students are facing
significant budgetary constraints. We believe that the overall level of state
financial aid for our students is likely to decrease in the near term, but we
cannot predict how significant any such reductions will be or how long they will
last.
In
addition to Title IV and other government-administered programs, all of our
schools participate in alternative loan programs for their students. Alternative
loans fill the gap between what the student receives from all financial aid
sources and what the student may need to cover the full cost of their education.
Students or their parents can apply to a number of different lenders for this
funding at current market interest rates.
Effective
February 2008, SLM terminated its tiered discount loan agreement with us
pursuant to which SLM provided private party loans to our
students. As a result, we continue to search for alternative
sub-prime loan providers but in the meantime we have decided to make financing
available to students through our internal funding sources.
Reorganization
We were
founded in 1946 as Lincoln Technical Institute, Inc. In February 2003,
we reorganized our corporate structure to create a holding company, Lincoln
Educational Services Corporation. The ownership of Lincoln Educational Services
Corporation was identical to that of Lincoln Technical Institute, Inc.
immediately prior to this reorganization. We subsequently began operating our
entire organization under the Lincoln Educational Services Corporation name;
however, before this reorganization, all of our interaction with the DOE, state
and federal regulators and accrediting agencies was conducted by Lincoln
Technical Institute, Inc.
Regulation
of Federal Student Financial Aid Programs
To
participate in Title IV Programs, an institution must be authorized to
offer its programs by the relevant state education agencies in the state in
which it is physically located, be accredited by an accrediting commission
recognized by the DOE and be certified as eligible by the DOE. The DOE will
certify an institution to participate in Title IV Programs only after the
institution has demonstrated compliance with the Higher Education Act of 1965,
as amended, HEA or Higher Education Act, and the DOE's extensive regulations
regarding institutional eligibility. The DOE defines an institution to consist
of both a main campus and its additional locations, if any. Under this
definition, for DOE purposes, we have the following 15 institutions,
collectively consisting of 15 main campuses and 20 additional
locations:
Brand
|
|
Main
Campus (es)
|
|
Additional
Location (s)
|
Lincoln
Technical Institute
|
|
Union,
NJ
|
|
Mahwah,
NJ
|
|
|
|
|
Queens,
NY
|
|
|
Philadelphia,
PA
|
|
|
|
|
Columbia,
MD
|
|
|
|
|
Grand
Prairie, TX
|
|
|
|
|
Allentown,
PA
|
|
|
|
|
Edison,
NJ
|
|
Mount
Laurel, NJ
|
|
|
|
|
Paramus,
NJ
|
|
|
|
|
Philadelphia,
PA (Center City)
|
|
|
|
|
Northeast
Philadelphia, PA
|
|
|
Somerville,
MA
|
|
Lowell,
MA
|
|
|
Lincoln,
RI
|
|
Marietta,
GA*
|
|
|
|
|
Brockton,
MA
|
|
|
|
|
Henderson,
NV (Green Valley)**
|
|
|
|
|
Las
Vegas, NV (Summerlin)**
|
|
|
New
Britain, CT
|
|
Shelton,
CT
|
|
|
|
|
Cromwell,
CT
|
|
|
|
|
Hamden,
CT
|
|
|
|
|
Mount
Laurel, NJ
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lincoln
College of Technology
|
|
Indianapolis,
IN
|
|
|
|
|
Melrose
Park, IL
|
|
|
|
|
Denver,
CO
|
|
|
|
|
West
Palm Beach, FL
|
|
West
Palm Beach, FL (Culinary)***
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nashville
Auto Diesel College
|
|
Nashville,
TN
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Southwestern
College of Technology
|
|
Dayton,
OH
|
|
Cincinnati,
OH (Vine Street)
|
|
|
|
|
Franklin,
OH
|
|
|
|
|
Cincinnati,
OH (Northland Blvd.)
|
|
|
|
|
Florence,
KY
|
*
|
This campus operates under the Lincoln College of Technology
brand.
|
**
|
These campuses operate under the Euphoria Institute of Beauty Arts
& Sciences brands.
|
***
|
This campus operates under the Florida Culinary Institute
brand.
|
All of
our main campuses, including their additional locations, are currently certified
by the DOE to participate in the Title IV Programs. In connection
with our acquisitions of Southwestern College, New England Technical Institute,
and New England Institute of Technology at Palm Beach, we have received in each
case an executed provisional program participation agreement from the
DOE.
The DOE,
accrediting commissions and state education agencies have responsibilities for
overseeing compliance with Title IV Program requirements. As a result, each
of our schools is subject to detailed oversight and review, and must comply with
a complex framework of laws and regulations. Because the DOE periodically
revises its regulations and changes its interpretation of existing laws and
regulations, we cannot predict with certainty how the Title IV Program
requirements will be applied in all circumstances.
Significant
factors relating to Title IV Programs that could adversely affect us
include the following:
Congressional
Action. Political and budgetary concerns
significantly affect Title IV Programs. Congress must reauthorize the
Higher Education Act approximately every five years. Recently, Congress
temporarily extended the provisions of the Higher Education Act, or HEA, pending
completion of the formal reauthorization process. In February 2006, Congress
enacted the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, which contained a number of
provisions affecting Title IV Programs, including some provisions that had been
in the HEA reauthorization bills. We believe that, in 2008, Congress will either
complete the reauthorization of the HEA or further extend additional provisions
of the HEA. Numerous changes to the HEA are likely to result from any further
reauthorization and, possibly, from any extension of the remaining provisions of
the HEA, but at this time we cannot predict all of the changes the Congress will
ultimately make.
In
addition, Congress reviews and determines federal appropriations for
Title IV Programs on an annual basis. Congress can also make changes in the
laws affecting Title IV Programs in the annual appropriations bills and in
other laws it enacts between the Higher Education Act reauthorizations. Because
a significant percentage of our revenues are derived from Title IV
Programs, any action by Congress that significantly reduces Title IV
Program funding or the ability of our schools or students to participate in
Title IV Programs could reduce our student enrollment and our revenues.
Congressional action may also increase our administrative costs and require us
to modify our practices in order for our schools to comply fully with
Title IV Program requirements. The College Cost Reduction &
Access Act, which was signed into law in September 2007, cut approximately $22
billion in subsidies to federal student lenders and guarantors as an offset to
increases to federal financial aid. This resulted in significant
changes to the terms that alternative lending providers were willing to make and
resulted in the tiered discount programs.
The
College Cost Reduction & Access Act reduces payments to lenders and guaranty
agencies participating in the Federal Family Education Loan (FFEL) Program.
This, in turn, reduces the profitability of the FFEL Program and will make
access to these loans, as well as, private loans more difficult. The widening
sub-prime mortgage crisis has negatively impacted student
loans. Lenders are experiencing difficulty in securing funding from
the debt markets to make new student loans.
The "90/10
Rule." A proprietary institution, such as each of
our institutions, loses its eligibility to participate in Title IV Programs
if, based on cash receipts, it derives more than 90% of its revenues for any
fiscal year from Title IV Programs. Any institution that violates this rule
becomes ineligible to participate in Title IV Programs as of the first day
of the fiscal year following the fiscal year in which it exceeds 90%, and is
unable to apply to regain its eligibility until the next fiscal year. If one of
our institutions violated the 90/10 Rule and became ineligible to
participate in Title IV Programs but continued to disburse Title IV
Program funds, the DOE would require the institution to repay all Title IV
Program funds received by the institution after the effective date of the loss
of eligibility.
We have
calculated that, for each of our 2007, 2006 and 2005 fiscal years, none of our
institutions derived more than 86.6% of its revenues from Title IV
Programs. For our 2007 fiscal year, our institutions' 90/10 Rule
percentages ranged from 70.1% to 86.6%. We regularly monitor compliance with
this requirement to minimize the risk that any of our institutions would derive
more than the maximum percentage of its revenues from Title IV Programs for
any fiscal year.
Student Loan
Defaults. An institution may lose its eligibility
to participate in some or all Title IV Programs if the rates at which the
institution's current and former students default on their federal student loans
exceed specified percentages. The DOE calculates these rates based on the number
of students who have defaulted, not the dollar amount of such defaults. The DOE
calculates an institution's cohort default rate (as defined by the DOE
regulations) on an annual basis as the rate at which borrowers scheduled to
begin repayment on their loans in one year default on those loans by the end of
the next year. An institution whose Federal Family Education Loan cohort default
rate is 25% or greater for three consecutive federal fiscal years (which
correspond to our fiscal years) loses eligibility to participate in the Federal
Family Education Loan and Pell programs for the remainder of the federal fiscal
year in which the DOE determines that such institution has lost its eligibility
and for the two subsequent federal fiscal years. An institution whose Federal
Family Education Loan cohort default rate for any single federal fiscal year
exceeds 40% may have its eligibility to participate in all Title IV
Programs limited, suspended or terminated by the DOE.
Federal
Family Education Loan Program
None of
our institutions has had a Federal Family Education Loan cohort default rate (as
defined by the DOE) of 25% or greater for any of the federal fiscal years 2005,
2004 and 2003, the three most recent years for which the DOE has published such
rates. Nine of our 15 institutions (which include 23 of 34 campuses) had default
rates less than 10% for these years. These 23 campuses are eligible to disburse
loans to first-time, first-year students without waiting for an initial 30 day
period. The following table sets forth the Federal Family Education Loan cohort
default rates for each of our 15 DOE numbered institutions for those fiscal
years:
Institution
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
Union,
NJ
|
|
|
9.90 |
% |
|
|
7.60 |
% |
|
|
7.10 |
% |
Indianapolis,
IN
|
|
|
7.50 |
% |
|
|
7.90 |
% |
|
|
7.90 |
% |
Philadelphia,
PA
|
|
|
9.20 |
% |
|
|
12.80 |
% |
|
|
15.40 |
% |
Columbia,
MD
|
|
|
7.50 |
% |
|
|
8.90 |
% |
|
|
8.80 |
% |
Allentown,
PA
|
|
|
11.50 |
% |
|
|
7.00 |
% |
|
|
3.90 |
% |
Melrose
Park, IL
|
|
|
11.60 |
% |
|
|
11.90 |
% |
|
|
9.60 |
% |
Grand
Prairie, TX
|
|
|
14.60 |
% |
|
|
19.50 |
% |
|
|
10.80 |
% |
Edison,
NJ
|
|
|
6.70 |
% |
|
|
3.30 |
% |
|
|
5.00 |
% |
Denver,
CO
|
|
|
7.00 |
% |
|
|
8.40 |
% |
|
|
9.10 |
% |
Nashville,
TN
|
|
|
5.20 |
% |
|
|
3.10 |
% |
|
|
1.80 |
% |
Lincoln,
RI
|
|
|
12.80 |
% |
|
|
10.00 |
% |
|
|
7.40 |
% |
Somerville,
MA
|
|
|
8.50 |
% |
|
|
10.60 |
% |
|
|
8.90 |
% |
Southwestern,
OH
|
|
|
7.60 |
% |
|
|
3.20 |
% |
|
|
6.20 |
% |
New
England, CT
|
|
|
4.60 |
% |
|
|
4.60 |
% |
|
|
1.70 |
% |
West
Palm Beach, FL
|
|
|
4.70 |
% |
|
|
8.20 |
% |
|
|
9.20 |
% |
An
institution whose cohort default rate under the FFEL program is 25% or greater
for any one of the three most recent federal fiscal years does not meet the DOE
standards of administrative capability may be placed on provisional
certification status by the DOE. None of our institutions have a Federal Family
Education Loan cohort default rate above 25% for any of the three most recent
fiscal years for which the DOE has published rates.
Perkins
Loan Program
An
institution whose Perkins cohort default rate is 50% or greater for three
consecutive federal award years loses eligibility to participate in the Perkins
program for the remainder of the federal award year in which DOE determines that
the institution has lost its eligibility and for the two subsequent federal
award years. None of our institutions has had a Perkins cohort default rate of
50% or greater for any of the last three federal award years. The DOE also will
not provide any additional federal funds to an institution for Perkins loans in
any federal award year in which the institution's Perkins cohort default rate is
25% or greater. Denver LCT and NETI are our only institutions participating in
the Perkins program. Denver LCT’s cohort default rate was 17.54% for students
scheduled to begin repayment in the 2005-2006 federal award year. The DOE did
not provide any additional Federal Capital Contribution Funds for Perkins loans
to Denver LCT. Denver LCT continues to make loans out of its existing Perkins
loan fund. Lincoln Technical Institute (New Britain, CT) is provisionally
certified by the DOE based on its change in ownership and on a finding by the
DOE prior to the change in ownership that NETI had not transmitted certain data
related to the Perkins program to the National Student Loan Data System during
periods prior to the acquisition. Our New Britain, CT institution’s cohort
default rate was 11.94% for students scheduled to begin repayment in the
2005-2006 federal award year.
Financial
Responsibility Standards. All institutions
participating in Title IV Programs must satisfy specific standards of
financial responsibility. The DOE evaluates institutions for compliance with
these standards each year, based on the institution's annual audited financial
statements, as well as following a change in ownership resulting in a change of
control of the institution.
The most
significant financial responsibility measurement is the institution's composite
score, which is calculated by the DOE based on three ratios:
|
·
|
The equity ratio, which measures
the institution's capital resources, ability to borrow and financial
viability;
|
|
·
|
The primary reserve ratio, which
measures the institution's ability to support current operations from
expendable resources; and
|
|
·
|
The net income ratio, which
measures the institution's ability to operate at a
profit.
|
The DOE
assigns a strength factor to the results of each of these ratios on a scale from
negative 1.0 to positive 3.0, with negative 1.0 reflecting financial weakness
and positive 3.0 reflecting financial strength. The DOE then assigns a weighting
percentage to each ratio and adds the weighted scores for the three ratios
together to produce a composite score for the institution. The composite score
must be at least 1.5 for the institution to be deemed financially responsible
without the need for further oversight. If an institution's composite score is
below 1.5, but is at least 1.0, it is in a category denominated by the DOE as
"the zone." Under the DOE regulations, institutions that are in the zone are
deemed to be financially responsible for a period of up to three years but are
required to accept payment of Title IV Program funds under the cash
monitoring or reimbursement method of payment and to provide to the DOE timely
information regarding various oversight and financial events.
If an
institution's composite score is below 1.0, the institution is considered by the
DOE to lack financial responsibility. If the DOE determines that an institution
does not satisfy the DOE's financial responsibility standards, depending on its
composite score and other factors, that institution may establish its financial
responsibility on an alternative basis by, among other things:
|
·
|
Posting a letter of credit in an
amount equal to at least 50% of the total Title IV Program funds
received by the institution during the institution's most recently
completed fiscal year;
|
|
·
|
Posting a letter of credit in an
amount equal to at least 10% of such prior year's Title IV Program
funds, accepting provisional certification, complying with additional DOE
monitoring requirements and agreeing to receive Title IV Program
funds under an arrangement other than the DOE's standard advance funding
arrangement; and/or
|
|
·
|
Complying with additional DOE
monitoring requirements and agreeing to receive Title IV Program
funds under an arrangement other than the DOE's standard advance funding
arrangement.
|
The DOE
has evaluated the financial responsibility of our institutions on a consolidated
basis. We have submitted to the DOE our audited financial statements
for the 2005 and 2006 fiscal year reflecting a composite score of 2.5 and 1.7,
respectively, based upon our calculations, and that our schools meet the DOE
standards of financial responsibility. For the 2007 fiscal year, we have
calculated our composite score to be 1.8.
Beginning December 30, 2004 and for a
period of three years, all of our institutions were placed on "Heightened Cash
Monitoring, Type 1 status." As a result, we were subject to a less favorable
Title IV fund payment system that required us to credit student accounts before
drawing down Title IV funds and also required us to timely notify the DOE with
respect to certain enumerated oversight and financial events. The DOE has notified us that, as of December
31, 2007, we are no longer
subject to Heightened Cash Monitoring, Type 1 status.
Return of
Title IV Funds. An institution participating
in Title IV Programs must calculate the amount of unearned Title IV
Program funds that have been disbursed to students who withdraw from their
educational programs before completing them, and must return those unearned
funds to the DOE or the applicable lending institution in a timely manner, which
is generally within 45 days from the date the institution determines that
the student has withdrawn.
If an
institution is cited in an audit or program review for returning Title IV
Program funds late for 5% or more of the students in the audit or program review
sample, the institution must post a letter of credit in favor of the DOE in an
amount equal to 25% of the total amount of Title IV Program funds that
should have been returned for students who withdrew in the institution's
previous fiscal year. During the 2005 audit period Southwestern College
made late returns of Title IV Program funds in excess of the DOE's
prescribed threshold, most of which predated our acquisition of
Southwestern College. As a result, in accordance with DOE regulations, we
have submitted a letter of credit to the DOE in the amount of $0.3 million,
which expires in July 2008.
School
Acquisitions. When a company acquires a school
that is eligible to participate in Title IV Programs, that school undergoes
a change of ownership resulting in a change of control as defined by the DOE.
Upon such a change of control, a school's eligibility to participate in
Title IV Programs is generally suspended until it has applied for
recertification by the DOE as an eligible school under its new ownership, which
requires that the school also re-establish its state authorization and
accreditation. The DOE may temporarily and provisionally certify an institution
seeking approval of a change of control under certain circumstances while the
DOE reviews the institution's application. The time required for the DOE to act
on such an application may vary substantially. DOE recertification of an
institution following a change of control will be on a provisional basis. Our
expansion plans are based, in part, on our ability to acquire additional schools
and have them certified by the DOE to participate in Title IV Programs. Our
expansion plans take into account the approval requirements of the DOE and the
relevant state education agencies and accrediting commissions.
Change of
Control. In addition to school acquisitions, other types of
transactions can also cause a change of control. The DOE, most state education
agencies and our accrediting commissions have standards pertaining to the change
of control of schools, but these standards are not uniform. DOE regulations
describe some transactions that constitute a change of control, including the
transfer of a controlling interest in the voting stock of an institution or the
institution's parent corporation. For a publicly traded corporation, DOE
regulations provide that a change of control occurs in one of two ways:
(a) if a person acquires ownership and control of the corporation so that
the corporation is required to file a Current Report on Form 8-K with the
Securities and Exchange Commission disclosing the change of control or
(b) if the corporation has a shareholder that owns at least 25% of the
total outstanding voting stock of the corporation and is the largest shareholder
of the corporation, and that shareholder ceases to own at least 25% of such
stock or ceases to be the largest shareholder. These standards are subject to
interpretation by the DOE.
A
significant purchase or disposition of our common stock could be determined by
the DOE to be a change of control under this standard. Most of the states and
our accrediting commissions include the sale of a controlling interest of common
stock in the definition of a change of control although some agencies could
determine that the sale or disposition of a smaller interest would result in a
change of control. A change of control under the definition of one of these
agencies would require the affected school to reaffirm its state authorization
or accreditation. Some agencies would require approval prior to a sale or
disposition that would result in a change of control in order to maintain
authorization or accreditation. The requirements to obtain such
reaffirmation from the states and our accrediting commissions vary
widely.
A change
of control could occur as a result of future transactions in which our company
or schools are involved. Some corporate reorganizations and some changes in the
board of directors are examples of such transactions. Moreover, the potential
adverse effects of a change of control could influence future decisions by us
and our stockholders regarding the sale, purchase, transfer, issuance or
redemption of our stock. In addition, the adverse regulatory effect of a change
of control also could discourage bids for your shares of common stock and could
have an adverse effect on the market price of the Company’s shares.
Opening
Additional Schools and Adding Educational
Programs. For-profit educational institutions must
be authorized by their state education agencies and be fully operational for two
years before applying to the DOE to participate in Title IV Programs.
However, an institution that is certified to participate in Title IV
Programs may establish an additional location and apply to participate in
Title IV Programs at that location without reference to the two-year
requirement, if such additional location satisfies all other applicable DOE
eligibility requirements. Our expansion plans are based, in part, on our ability
to open new schools as additional locations of our existing institutions and
take into account the DOE's approval requirements.
A student
may use Title IV Program funds only to pay the costs associated with
enrollment in an eligible educational program offered by an institution
participating in Title IV Programs. Generally, an institution that is
eligible to participate in Title IV Programs may add a new educational
program without DOE approval if that new program leads to an associate level or
higher degree and the institution already offers programs at that level, or if
that program prepares students for gainful employment in the same or a related
occupation as an educational program that has previously been designated as an
eligible program at that institution and meets minimum length requirements. If
an institution erroneously determines that an educational program is eligible
for purposes of Title IV Programs, the institution would likely be liable
for repayment of Title IV Program funds provided to students in that
educational program. Our expansion plans are based, in part, on our ability to
add new educational programs at our existing schools. We do not believe that
current DOE regulations will create significant obstacles to our plans to add
new programs.
Some of
the state education agencies and our accrediting commission also have
requirements that may affect our schools' ability to open a new campus,
establish an additional location of an existing institution or begin offering a
new educational program. Our Cincinnati (Vine Street), OH campus is currently
required to submit retention data to the ACICS. Any institution required
to submit retention data to the ACICS may be required to obtain prior permission
from the ACICS for the initiation of any new program or new branch campus or
learning site. We do not believe that these standards will create significant
obstacles to our expansion plans.
Administrative
Capability. The DOE assesses the administrative
capability of each institution that participates in Title IV Programs under
a series of separate standards. Failure to satisfy any of the standards may lead
the DOE to find the institution ineligible to participate in Title IV
Programs or to place the institution on provisional certification as a condition
of its participation. These criteria require, among other things, that the
institution:
|
·
|
Complies with all applicable
federal student financial aid
regulations;
|
|
·
|
Has capable and sufficient
personnel to administer the federal student financial aid
programs;
|
|
·
|
Has
adequate checks and balance in its system of internal
controls;
|
|
·
|
Divides
the function of authorizing and disbursing or delivering Title IV Program
Funds so that no office has the responsibility for both
functions;
|
|
·
|
Establishes
and maintains records required under the Title IV
regulations;
|
|
·
|
Develops
and applies an adequate system to identify and resolve discrepancies in
information from sources regarding a student’s application for financial
aid under Title IV;
|
|
·
|
Has acceptable methods of
defining and measuring the satisfactory academic progress of its
students;
|
|
·
|
Refers to the Office of the
Inspector General any credible information indicating that any applicant,
student, employee or agent of the school has been engaged in any fraud or
other illegal conduct involving Title IV
Programs;
|
|
·
|
Provides financial aid counseling
to its students; and
|
|
·
|
Submits
in a timely manner all reports and financial statements required by the
regulations.
|
Failure
by an institution to satisfy any of these or other administrative capability
criteria could cause the institution to lose its eligibility to participate in
Title IV Programs, which would have a material adverse effect on our
business and results of operations.
Other
standards provide that an institution may be found to lack administrative
capability and be placed on provisional certification if its student loan
default rate under the Federal Family Education Loan program is 25% or greater
for any of the three most recent federal fiscal years, or if its Perkins cohort
default rate exceeds 15% for any federal award year. None of our institutions
has a Federal Family Education Loan cohort default rate above 25% for any of the
three most recent fiscal years for which the DOE has published rates. Denver LCT
and NETI are our only institutions participating in the Perkins program. Denver
LCT 's cohort default rate was 17.54% for students scheduled to begin repayment
in the 2005-2006 federal award year. The DOE did not provide any additional
Federal Capital Contribution Funds for Perkins loans to Denver LCT. Denver
LCT continues to make loans out of its existing Perkins loan fund. As was the
case prior to our acquisition NETI, the institution remains provisionally
certified by the DOE based on its change in ownership and on a finding by the
DOE prior to the change in ownership that NETI had not transmitted certain data
related to the Perkins program to the National Student Loan Data System during
periods prior to the acquisition. NETI 's cohort default rate was 11.94% for
students scheduled to begin repayment in the 2005-2006 federal award
year.
Ability to
Benefit Regulations. Under certain circumstances,
an institution may elect to admit non-high school graduates, or "ability to
benefit," students, into certain of its programs of study. In order for ability
to benefit students to be eligible for Title IV Program participation, the
institution must comply with the ability to benefit requirements set forth in
the Title IV Program requirements. The basic evaluation method to determine
that a student has the ability to benefit from the program is the student's
achievement of a minimum score on a test approved by the DOE and independently
administered in accordance with DOE regulations. In addition to the testing
requirements, the DOE regulations also prohibit ability to benefit student
enrollments from constituting 50% or more of the total enrollment of the
institution. In 2007, the following schools were authorized to enroll “ability
to benefit” applicants: Southwestern College, New Britain, Cromwell, Shelton,
Hamden, Union, Mahwah, Indianapolis, Melrose Park, Grand Prairie, Somerville,
Denver, West Palm Beach, Center City Philadelphia, Northeast Philadelphia,
Paramus, Mt. Laurel, Marietta, Lowell, Edison, Brockton, and
Allentown.
Restrictions on
Payment of Commissions, Bonuses and Other Incentive
Payments. An institution participating in
Title IV Programs may not provide any commission, bonus or other incentive
payment based directly or indirectly on success in securing enrollments or
financial aid to any person or entity engaged in any student recruiting or
admission activities or in making decisions regarding the awarding of
Title IV Program funds. In November 2002, the DOE published new
regulations which attempt to clarify the "incentive compensation rule." Failure
to comply with the incentive compensation rule could result in loss of ability
to participate in Title IV Programs or in fines or liabilities. We believe
that our current compensation plans are in compliance with the Higher Education
Act and the DOE's new regulations, although we cannot assure you that the DOE
will not find deficiencies in our compensation plans.
Eligibility and
Certification Procedures. Each institution must
periodically apply to the DOE for continued certification to participate in
Title IV Programs. The institution must also apply for recertification when
it undergoes a change in ownership resulting in a change of control. The
institution also may come under DOE review when it undergoes a substantive
change that requires the submission of an application, such as opening an
additional location or raising the highest academic credential it
offers.
The DOE
may place an institution on provisional certification status if it determines
that the institution does not fully satisfy certain administrative and financial
standards or if the institution undergoes a change in ownership resulting in a
change of control. The DOE may withdraw an institution's provisional
certification with the institution having fewer due process protections than if
it were fully certified. In addition, the DOE may more closely review an
institution that is provisionally certified if it applies for approval to open a
new location, add an educational program, acquire another school or make any
other significant change. Provisional certification does not otherwise limit an
institution's access to Title IV Program funds. In connection with our
acquisitions of Southwestern College, NETI, and New England Institute of
Technology at Palm Beach we received in each case an executed provisional
program participation agreement from the DOE.
All
institutions are recertified on various dates for various amounts of
time. The following table sets forth the expiration dates for each of
our institutions' current program participation agreement:
Institution
|
|
Expiration
Date of Current
Program
Participation Agreement
|
Allentown,
PA
|
|
September 30,
2007*
|
Columbia,
MD
|
|
June 30,
2013
|
Philadelphia,
PA
|
|
December
31, 2013
|
Denver,
CO
|
|
December 31,
2009
|
Lincoln,
RI
|
|
June 30,
2008
|
Nashville,
TN
|
|
June 30,
2008
|
Somerville,
MA
|
|
June 30,
2008
|
Edison,
NJ
|
|
June 30,
2011
|
Union,
NJ
|
|
June 30,
2011
|
Grand
Prairie, TX
|
|
March 31,
2009
|
Indianapolis,
IN
|
|
March 31,
2009
|
Melrose
Park, IL
|
|
March 31,
2009
|
Dayton,
OH
|
|
June
30, 2008**
|
New
Britain, CT
|
|
March 31,
2009**
|
West
Palm Beach, FL
|
|
June 30,
2010**
|
* Pending completion of
reaccreditation process
** Provisionally
certified
Compliance with
Regulatory Standards and Effect of Regulatory
Violations. Our schools are subject to audits,
program reviews, and site visits by various regulatory agencies, including the
DOE, the DOE's Office of Inspector General, state education agencies, student
loan guaranty agencies, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs and our
accrediting commissions. In addition, each of our institutions must retain an
independent certified public accountant to conduct an annual audit of the
institution's administration of Title IV Program funds. The institution
must submit the resulting audit report to the DOE for review. The DOE
conducted a program review at Southwestern College (SWC) and issued an initial
program review report, dated February 6, 2008, in which it identified potential
instances of noncompliance with certain DOE requirements. SWC expects
to respond to the DOE initial program review report on or before April 4,
2008.
If one of
our schools failed to comply with accrediting or state licensing requirements,
such school and its main and/or branch campuses could be subject to the loss of
state licensure or accreditation, which in turn could result in a loss of
eligibility to participate in Title IV Programs. If the DOE determined that
one of our institutions improperly disbursed Title IV Program funds or
violated a provision of the Higher Education Act or DOE regulations, the
institution could be required to repay such funds and related costs to the DOE
and lenders, and could be assessed an administrative fine. The DOE could also
place the institution on provisional certification and/or transfer the
institution to the reimbursement or cash monitoring system of receiving
Title IV Program funds, under which an institution must disburse its own
funds to students and document the students' eligibility for Title IV
Program funds before receiving such funds from the DOE. An
institution that is operating under this "Heightened Cash Monitoring, Type 1
status," is required to credit student accounts before drawing down funds under
Title IV Programs and to draw down funds in an amount no greater than the
previous disbursement to students and parents. Additionally, the institution's
compliance audit will be required to contain verification that this did occur
throughout the year. In addition to the above, the DOE has required us to comply
with certain requirements prescribed for institutions operating in "the zone,"
which is indicative of a composite score between 1.0 and 1.4. Those requirements
include providing timely information regarding any of the following oversight
and financial events:
|
·
|
Any adverse action, including a
probation or similar action, taken against the institution by its
accrediting agency;
|
|
·
|
Any event that causes the
institution, or related entity to realize any liability that was noted as
a contingent liability in the institution's or related entity's most
recent audit financial
statement;
|
|
·
|
Any violation by the institution
of any loan agreement;
|
|
·
|
Any
failure of the institution to make a payment in accordance with its debt
obligations that results in a creditor filing suit to recover funds under
those obligations;
|
|
·
|
Any withdrawal of owner's equity
from institution by any means, including declaring a dividend;
or
|
|
·
|
Any extraordinary losses, as
defined in accordance with Accounting Principles Board Opinion
No. 30.
|
Operating
under the zone requirements may also require the institution to submit its
financial statement and compliance audits earlier than the date previously
required and require the institution to provide information about its current
operations and future plans. An institution that continues to fail to meet the
financial responsibility standards set by the DOE or does not comply with the
zone requirements may lose its eligibility to continue to participate in Title
IV funding. If eligibility is lost, the institution may be required
to post irrevocable letters of credit, for an amount determined by the DOE at a
minimum of 50% of the Title IV Program funds received by the institution during
its most recently completed fiscal year. The institution may also be required to
post irrevocable letters of credit at a minimum of 10% of such funds and be
provisionally certified and subject to other reporting and monitoring
requirements.
Significant
violations of Title IV Program requirements by us or any of our
institutions could be the basis for a proceeding by the DOE to limit, suspend or
terminate the participation of the affected institution in Title IV
Programs or to civil or criminal penalties. Generally, such a termination
extends for 18 months before the institution may apply for reinstatement of
its participation. There is no DOE proceeding pending to fine any of our
institutions or to limit, suspend or terminate any of our institutions'
participation in Title IV Programs.
We and
our schools are also subject to complaints and lawsuits relating to regulatory
compliance brought not only by our regulatory agencies, but also by third
parties, such as present or former students or employees and other members of
the public. If we are unable to successfully resolve or defend against any such
complaint or lawsuit, we may be required to pay money damages or be subject to
fines, limitations, loss of federal funding, injunctions or other penalties.
Moreover, even if we successfully resolve or defend against any such complaint
or lawsuit, we may have to devote significant financial and management resources
in order to reach such a result.
Lenders and Guaranty
Agencies. In 2007, six lenders provided funding to
more than 90% of the students at the schools we owned during that year: Citibank
Student Loan Corporation, AMS Trust, Citizens Bank, Regions Bank, Wachovia Bank,
and Nelnet. While we believe that other lenders would be willing to make
federally guaranteed student loans to our students if loans were no longer
available from our current lenders, there can be no assurances in this regard.
In addition, the Higher Education Act requires the establishment of lenders of
last resort in every state to ensure that loans are available to students at any
school that cannot otherwise identify lenders willing to make federally
guaranteed loans to its students.
Our
primary guarantors for Title IV loans are USA Group, a subsidiary of Sallie
Mae, and New Jersey Higher Education Assistance Authority, an independent agency
of the State of New Jersey. These two agencies currently guarantee a majority of
the federally guaranteed student loans made to students enrolled at our schools.
There are six other guaranty agencies that guarantee student loans made to
students enrolled at our schools. We believe that other guaranty agencies would
be willing to guarantee loans to our students if any of the guaranty agencies
ceased guaranteeing those loans or reduced the volume of loans they guarantee,
although there can be no assurances in this regard.
The
following risk factors and other information included in this Form 10-K should
be carefully considered. The risks and uncertainties described below are not the
only ones we face. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us
or that we currently believe are not material may also adversely affect our
business, financial condition, operating results, cash flows and
prospects.
RISKS RELATED TO OUR
INDUSTRY
Failure
of our schools to comply with the extensive regulatory requirements for school
operations could result in financial penalties, restrictions on our operations
and loss of external financial aid funding, which could affect our revenues and
impose significant operating restrictions on us.
Our
schools are subject to extensive regulation by federal and state governmental
agencies and by accrediting commissions. In particular, the Higher Education Act
of 1965, as amended, and the regulations promulgated thereunder by the DOE, set
forth numerous standards that our schools must satisfy to participate in various
federal student financial assistance programs under Title IV Programs. In
2007, we derived approximately 80% of our revenues, calculated based on cash
receipts, from Title IV Programs. To participate in Title IV Programs,
each of our schools must receive and maintain authorization by the applicable
education agencies in the state in which each school is physically located, be
accredited by an accrediting commission recognized by the DOE and be certified
as an eligible institution by the DOE. These regulatory requirements cover the
vast majority of our operations, including our educational programs, facilities,
instructional and administrative staff, administrative procedures, marketing,
recruiting, student performances and outcomes, financial operations and
financial condition. These regulatory requirements also affect our ability to
acquire or open additional schools, add new educational programs, expand
existing educational programs, and change our corporate structure and
ownership.
If any of
our schools fails to comply with applicable regulatory requirements, the school
and its related main campus and/or additional locations could be subject to the
loss of state licensure or accreditation, the loss of eligibility to participate
in and receive funds under the Title IV Programs, the loss of the ability
to grant degrees, diplomas and certificates, provisional certification, or the
imposition of liabilities or monetary penalties, each of which could adversely
affect our revenues and impose significant operating restrictions upon us. In
addition, the loss by any of our schools of its accreditation, its state
authorization or license, or its eligibility to participate in Title IV
Programs constitutes an event of default under our credit agreement, which we
and our subsidiaries entered into with a syndicate of banks on February 15,
2005. An event of default on our credit agreement could result in the
acceleration of all amounts then outstanding under our credit agreement. The
various regulatory agencies periodically revise their requirements and modify
their interpretations of existing requirements and restrictions. We cannot
predict with certainty how any of these regulatory requirements will be applied
or whether each of our schools will be able to comply with these requirements or
any additional requirements instituted in the future.
If
we or our eligible institutions do not meet the financial responsibility
standards prescribed by the DOE, as has occurred in the past, we may be required
to post letters of credit or our eligibility to participate in Title IV Programs
could be terminated or limited, which could significantly reduce our student
population and revenues.
To
participate in Title IV Programs, an eligible institution must satisfy specific
measures of financial responsibility prescribed by the DOE or post a letter of
credit in favor of the DOE and possibly accept other conditions on its
participation in Title IV Programs. Any obligation to post one
or more letters of credit would increase our costs of regulatory
compliance. Our inability to obtain a required letter of credit or
limitations on, or termination of, our participation in Title IV Programs could
limit our students' access to various government-sponsored student financial aid
programs, which could significantly reduce our student population and
revenues.
Each
year, based on the financial information submitted by an eligible institution
that participates in Title IV Programs, the DOE calculates three financial
ratios for the institution: an equity ratio, a primary reserve ratio and a net
income ratio. Each of these ratios is scored separately and then combined into a
composite score to measure the institution's financial responsibility. If the
composite score for an institution falls below thresholds established by the
DOE, the DOE could place the institution on provisional certification and/or
transfer the institution to the reimbursement or cash monitoring system of
receiving Title IV Program funds, under which an institution must disburse its
own funds to students and document the student's eligibility for Title IV
Program funds before receiving such funds from the DOE. If an
institution has a composite score between 1.0 and 1.4, the institution will be
required to operate under "Heightened Cash Monitoring, Type 1
status." If an institution's composite score is below 1.0, the
institution is considered by the DOE to lack financial responsibility and, as a
condition of Title IV Program participation, the institution may be required to,
among other things, post a letter of credit in an amount of at least 10 to 50
percent of the institution's annual Title IV Program participation for its most
recent fiscal year.
Based on
our calculations, the 2007 and 2006 financial statements reflect a composite
score of 1.8 and 1.7, respectively. However, because our composite
scores for 2001 and 2002 were below 1.0, all of our institutions were placed on
"Heightened Cash Monitoring, Type 1 status" from December 30, 2004 through
December 30, 2007. If we revert to this status in the future or fail to comply
with applicable DOE requirements, we may lose our eligibility for continued
participation in Title IV Programs or may be required to post irrevocable
letters of credit. In addition, a composite score under 1.0 in any
future year could have an adverse effect on our operations and would result in a
default under our credit agreement and could result in an acceleration of the
debt under our credit agreement.
If
we fail to demonstrate "administrative capability" to the DOE, our business
could suffer.
DOE
regulations specify extensive criteria an institution must satisfy to establish
that it has the requisite "administrative capability" to participate in
Title IV Programs. These criteria require, among other things, that the
institution:
|
·
|
Comply with all applicable
Title IV regulations;
|
|
·
|
Have capable and sufficient
personnel to administer Title IV
Programs;
|
|
·
|
Has
adequate checks and balance in its system of internal
controls;
|
|
·
|
Divides
the function of authorizing and disbursing or delivering Title IV Program
Funds so that no office has the responsibility for both
functions;
|
|
·
|
Establishes
and maintains records required under the Title IV
regulations;
|
|
·
|
Develops
and applies an adequate system to identify and resolve discrepancies in
information from sources regarding a student’s application for financial
aid under Title IV;
|
|
·
|
Have acceptable methods of
defining and measuring the satisfactory academic progress of its
students;
|
|
·
|
Provide financial aid counseling
to its students; and
|
|
·
|
Submit in a timely manner all
reports and financial statements required by the
regulations.
|
If an
institution fails to satisfy any of these criteria or any other DOE regulation,
the DOE may:
|
·
|
Require the repayment of
Title IV funds;
|
|
·
|
Impose a less favorable payment
system for the institution's receipt of Title IV
funds;
|
|
·
|
Place the institution on
provisional certification status;
or
|
|
·
|
Commence a proceeding to impose a
fine or to limit, suspend or terminate the participation of the
institution in Title IV
Programs.
|
If we are
found not to have satisfied the DOE's "administrative capability" requirements,
one or more of our institutions, including its additional locations, could be
limited in its access to, or lose, Title IV Program funding. A decrease in
Title IV funding could adversely affect our revenues, as we received
approximately 80% of our revenues (calculated based on cash receipts) from
Title IV Programs in 2007.
We
are subject to fines and other sanctions if we pay impermissible commissions,
bonuses or other incentive payments to individuals involved in certain
recruiting, admissions or financial aid activities, which could increase our
cost of regulatory compliance and adversely affect our results of
operations.
A school
participating in Title IV Programs may not provide any commission, bonus or
other incentive payment based on directly or indirectly on success in enrolling
students or securing financial aid to any person involved in any student
recruiting or admission activities or in making decisions regarding the awarding
of Title IV Program funds. The law and regulations governing this
requirement do not establish clear criteria for compliance in all circumstances.
If we are found to have violated this law, we could be fined or otherwise
sanctioned by the DOE or we could face litigation filed under the qui tam provisions of the
Federal False Claims Act.
If we were involved in conflicts of
interest with student loan lenders, we could be subject to penalties and
otherwise suffer adverse impacts on our business.
In 2007,
the New York Attorney General, several other attorneys-general, the United
States Senate and House of Representatives Education Committees, and the DOE all
launched investigations of potential conflicts of interest between university
officials and various private lending organizations that provide student
loans. These investigations are ongoing, but several universities and
lending organizations have been implicated. Certain lenders, colleges
and universities that have been implicated by these investigations have agreed
to pay fines to settle claims in this regard. In addition, several
financial aid officials at other universities have been suspended or placed on
leaves of absence. While no allegations have been raised concerning
our institutions, we have received general requests for information from the
offices of two state attorneys-general. We have no reason to believe
that any of our employees have engaged in improper conduct in this
regard. If any such impropriety were found, we could be subject to
penalties and other adverse consequences.
If
our schools do not maintain their state authorizations and their accreditation,
they may not participate in Title IV Programs, which could adversely affect
our student population and revenues.
An
institution that grants degrees, diplomas or certificates must be authorized by
the appropriate education agency of the state in which it is located and, in
some cases, other states. Requirements for authorization vary substantially
among states. The school must be authorized by each state in which it is
physically located in order for its students to be eligible for funding under
Title IV Programs. Loss of state authorization by any of our schools from
the education agency of the state in which the school is located would end that
school's eligibility to participate in Title IV Programs and could cause us
to close the school.
A school
must be accredited by an accrediting commission recognized by the DOE in order
to participate in Title IV Programs. Accreditation is a non-governmental
process through which an institution submits to qualitative review by an
organization of peer institutions, based on the standards of the accrediting
agency and the stated aims and purposes of the institution, including achieving
and maintaining stringent retention, completion and placement outcomes. Certain
states require institutions to maintain accreditation as a condition of
continued authorization to grant degrees. The Higher Education Act requires
accrediting commissions recognized by the DOE to review and monitor many aspects
of an institution's operations and to take appropriate disciplinary action when
the institution fails to comply with the accrediting agency's standards. Loss of
accreditation by any of our main campuses would result in the termination of
eligibility of that school and all of its branch campuses to participate in
Title IV Programs and could cause us to close the school and its
branches.
Our
institutions would lose eligibility to participate in Title IV Programs if
the percentage of their revenues derived from those programs were too high,
which could reduce our student population and revenues.
Each of
our institutions and any of its additional locations would immediately lose its
eligibility to participate in Title IV Programs if it derived more than 90%
of its revenues (calculated based on cash receipts) from those programs in any
fiscal year as calculated in accordance with DOE regulations. Any institution
that violates this rule is ineligible to apply to regain its eligibility until
the following fiscal year. Based on our calculations, none of our institutions
received more than 90% of its revenues in fiscal year 2007, and our institution
with the highest percentage received approximately 86.6% of its revenues, from
Title IV Programs. If any of our institutions loses eligibility to
participate in Title IV Programs, that loss would cause an event of default
under our credit agreement, which could result in the acceleration of any
indebtedness then outstanding under our credit agreement, and would also
adversely affect our students' access to various government-sponsored student
financial aid programs, which could reduce our student population and revenues.
These calculations are required to be made based on cash receipts.
Our
institutions would lose eligibility to participate in Title IV Programs if
their former students defaulted on repayment of their federal student loans in
excess of specified levels, which could reduce our student population and
revenues.
An
institution of higher education, such as each of our institutions, loses its
eligibility to participate in some or all Title IV Programs if its former
students default on the repayment of their federal student loans in excess of
specified levels. If any of our institutions exceeds the official student loan
default rates published by the DOE, it will lose eligibility to participate in
Title IV Programs. That loss would adversely affect our students' access to
various government-sponsored student financial aid programs, which could reduce
our student population and revenues.
We
are subject to sanctions if we fail to correctly calculate and timely return
Title IV Program funds for students who withdraw before completing their
educational program, which could increase our cost of regulatory compliance and
decrease our profit margin.
An
institution participating in Title IV Programs must correctly calculate the
amount of unearned Title IV Program funds that have been credited to
students who withdraw from their educational programs before completing them and
must return those unearned funds in a timely manner, generally within
45 days of the date the institution determines that the student has
withdrawn. If the unearned funds are not properly calculated and timely
returned, we may have to post a letter of credit in favor of the DOE or may be
otherwise sanctioned by the DOE, which could increase our cost of regulatory
compliance and adversely affect our results of operations. During the
2005 audit period Southwestern College made late returns of Title IV
Program funds in excess of the DOE’s prescribed threshold, most of which
predated our acquisition of Southwestern College. As a result, in
accordance with DOE regulations, we have submitted a letter of credit to the DOE
in the amount of $0.3 million, which expires in June 2008.
If
regulators do not approve our acquisition of a school that participates in
Title IV Programs, the acquired school would no longer be permitted to
participate in Title IV Programs, which could impair our ability to operate
the acquired school as planned or to realize the anticipated benefits from the
acquisition of that school.
If we
acquire a school that participates in Title IV Programs, we must obtain
approval from the DOE and applicable state education agencies and accrediting
commissions in order for the school to be able to continue operating and
participating in Title IV Programs. An acquisition can result in the
temporary suspension of the acquired school's participation in Title IV
Programs unless we submit to the DOE a timely and materially complete
application for recertification and the DOE issues a temporary provisional
program participation agreement. If we were unable to timely re-establish the
state authorization, accreditation or DOE certification of the acquired school,
our ability to operate the acquired school as planned or to realize the
anticipated benefits from the acquisition of that school could be impaired. In
connection with our acquisitions of Southwestern College, New England Technical
Institute, and New England Institute of Technology at Palm Beach, we received in
each case an executed provisional program participation agreement from the DOE.
If
regulators do not approve or delay their approval of transactions involving a
change of control of our company or any of our schools, our ability to
participate in Title IV Programs may be impaired.
If we or
any of our schools experience a change of control under the standards of
applicable state education agencies, our accrediting commissions or the DOE, we
or the affected schools must seek the approval of the relevant regulatory
agencies in order for us or the acquired school to maintain required state
licensure and accreditation and to participate in Title IV Programs.
Transactions or events that constitute a change of control of us include
significant acquisitions or dispositions of our common stock (including,
pursuant to DOE regulations, sales by a shareholder that owns at least 25%
of our total outstanding voting stock and is our largest shareholder, as a
result of which sales such shareholder ceases to own at least 25% of our
outstanding voting stock or ceases to be our largest shareholder) or significant
changes in the composition of our board of directors. Some of these transactions
or events may be beyond our control. Our failure to obtain, or a delay in
receiving, approval of any change of control from any state in which our schools
are located or other states as the case may be, our accrediting commissions or
the DOE could impair or result in the termination of our accreditation, state
licensure or ability to participate in Title IV Programs. Our failure to
obtain, or a delay in obtaining, approval of any change of control from any
state in which we do not have a school but in which we recruit students could
require us to suspend our recruitment of students in that state until we receive
the required approval. The potential adverse effects of a change of control with
respect to participation in Title IV Programs could influence future
decisions by us and our stockholders regarding the sale, purchase, transfer,
issuance or redemption of our stock. In addition, the adverse regulatory effect
of a change of control also could discourage bids for shares of our common stock
and could have an adverse effect on the market price of shares of our common
stock.
Congress
may change the law or reduce funding for Title IV Programs, which could
reduce our student population, revenues or profit margin.
Congress
periodically revises the Higher Education Act and other laws governing
Title IV Programs and annually determines the funding level for each
Title IV Program. Recently, Congress temporarily extended the provisions of
the Higher Education Act, or HEA, pending completion of the formal
reauthorization process. In February 2006, Congress enacted the Deficit
Reduction Act of 2005, which contained a number of provisions affecting Title IV
Programs, including some provisions that had been in the HEA reauthorization
bills. We believe that, in 2008, Congress will either complete its
reauthorization of the HEA or further extend the provisions of the HEA. Numerous
changes to the HEA are likely to result from any further reauthorization and,
possibly, from any extension of the existing provisions of the HEA, but at this
time we cannot predict all of the changes that the U.S. Congress will ultimately
make. In January 2007, the political party to which a majority of the members of
both houses of the U.S. Congress are affiliated changed from the Republican
party to the Democratic party. As a result, it is possible that the
Democrat-controlled U.S. Congress will revise provisions of the HEA in
significantly different ways than were being considered by the
Republican-controlled U.S. Congress in 2005 and 2006. Approximately 80% of our
revenues in 2007 (calculated based on cash receipts) were derived from
Title IV programs. Any action by Congress that significantly reduces
funding for Title IV Programs or the ability of our schools or students to
receive funding through these programs could reduce our student population and
revenues. Congressional action may also require us to modify our practices in
ways that could result in increased administrative costs and decreased profit
margin.
In
addition, current requirements for student and school participation in
Title IV Programs may change or one or more of the present Title IV
Programs could be replaced by other programs with materially different student
or school eligibility requirements. If we cannot comply with the provisions of
the Higher Education Act, as they may be revised, or if the cost of such
compliance is excessive, our revenues or profit margin could be adversely
affected.
Regulatory
agencies or third parties may conduct compliance reviews, bring claims or
initiate litigation against us. If the results of these reviews or claims are
unfavorable to us, our results of operations and financial condition could be
adversely affected.
Because
we operate in a highly regulated industry, we are subject to compliance reviews
and claims of noncompliance and lawsuits by government agencies and third
parties. If the results of these reviews or proceedings are unfavorable to us,
or if we are unable to defend successfully against third-party lawsuits or
claims, we may be required to pay money damages or be subject to fines,
limitations on the operations of our business, loss of federal funding,
injunctions or other penalties. Even if we adequately address issues raised by
an agency review or successfully defend a third-party lawsuit or claim, we may
have to divert significant financial and management resources from our ongoing
business operations to address issues raised by those reviews or defend those
lawsuits or claims. The DOE conducted a program review at SWC and issued an
initial program review report, dated February 6, 2008, in which it identified
potential instances of noncompliance with certain DOE
requirements. SWC expects to respond to the DOE initial program
review report on or before April 4, 2008.
RISKS RELATED TO OUR
BUSINESS
If
we fail to effectively manage our growth, we may incur higher costs and expenses
than we anticipate in connection with our growth.
We have
experienced a period of significant growth since 1999. Our continued growth has
strained and may in the future strain our management, operations, employees or
other resources. We will need to continue to assess the adequacy of our staff,
controls and procedures to meet the demands of our continued growth. We may not
be able to maintain or accelerate our current growth rate, effectively manage
our expanding operations or achieve planned growth on a timely or profitable
basis. If we are unable to manage our growth effectively while maintaining
appropriate internal controls, we may experience operating inefficiencies that
likely will increase our expected costs.
We
may not be able to successfully integrate acquisitions into our business, which
may materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of
operations and could cause the market value of our common stock to
decline.
Since 1999, we have acquired a number
of schools and we intend to continue to grow our business through acquisitions
and internal expansion of our programs. The anticipated benefits of an
acquisition may not be achieved unless we successfully integrate the acquired
school or schools into our operations and are able to effectively manage, market
and apply our business strategy to any acquired schools. Integration challenges
include, among others, regulatory approvals, significant capital expenditures,
assumption of known and unknown liabilities and our ability to control costs.
The successful integration of future acquisitions may also require substantial
attention from our senior management and the senior management of the acquired
schools, which could decrease the time that they devote to the day-to-day
management of our business. The difficulties of integration may initially be
increased by the necessity of integrating personnel with disparate business
backgrounds and corporate cultures. Management's focus on the integration of
acquired schools and on the application of our business strategy to those
schools could interrupt or cause loss of momentum in our other ongoing
activities. Our
inability to properly manage or support the growth may have a material adverse
effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations and could
cause the market value of our common stock to decline.
Failure
on our part to establish and operate additional schools or campuses or
effectively identify suitable expansion opportunities could reduce our ability
to implement our growth strategy.
As part
of our business strategy, we anticipate opening and operating new schools or
campuses. Establishing new schools or campuses poses unique challenges and
requires us to make investments in management and capital expenditures, incur
marketing expenses and devote financial and other resources that are different,
and in some cases greater than those required with respect to the operation of
acquired schools.
To open a
new school or campus, we would be required to obtain appropriate state and
accrediting commission approvals, which may be conditioned or delayed in a
manner that could significantly affect our growth plans. In addition, to be
eligible for federal Title IV Program funding, a new school or campus would
have to be certified by the DOE and would require federal authorization and
approvals. In the case of entirely separate, freestanding U.S. schools, a
minimum of two years' operating history is required to be eligible for
Title IV Program funding. We cannot be sure that we will be able to
identify suitable expansion opportunities to maintain or accelerate our current
growth rate or that we will be able to successfully integrate or profitably
operate any new schools or campuses. A failure by us to effectively identify
suitable expansion opportunities and to establish and manage the operations of
newly established schools or online offerings could slow our growth and make any
newly established schools or our online programs unprofitable or more costly to
operate than we had planned.
Our
success depends in part on our ability to update and expand the content of
existing programs and develop new programs in a cost-effective manner and on a
timely basis.
Prospective
employers of our graduates increasingly demand that their entry-level employees
possess appropriate technological skills. These skills are becoming more
sophisticated in line with technological advancements in the automotive, diesel,
information technology, or IT, skilled trades, healthcare industries and spa and
culinary. Accordingly, educational programs at our schools must keep pace with
those technological advancements. The expansion of our existing programs and the
development of new programs may not be accepted by our students, prospective
employers or the technical education market. Even if we are able to develop
acceptable new programs, we may not be able to introduce these new programs as
quickly as our competitors or as quickly as employers demand. If we are unable
to adequately respond to changes in market requirements due to financial
constraints, unusually rapid technological changes or other factors, our ability
to attract and retain students could be impaired, our placement rates could
suffer and our revenues could be adversely affected.
In
addition, if we are unable to adequately anticipate the requirements of the
employers we serve, we may offer programs that do not teach skills useful to
prospective employers or students seeking a technical or career-oriented
education which could affect our placement rates and our ability to attract and
retain students, causing our revenues to be adversely affected.
Risks
specific to our schools’ online campuses could have a material adverse effect on
our business.
Our
schools’ online campuses intend to increase student enrollments, and more
resources will be required to support this growth, including additional faculty,
admissions, academic, and financial aid personnel. This growth may place a
strain on the operational resources of our schools’ online campuses. Our
schools’ online campuses’ success depends, in part, on their ability to expand
the content of their programs, develop new programs in a cost-effective manner,
maintain good standings with their regulators and accreditors, and meet their
students’ needs in a timely manner. The expansion of our schools’ online
campuses’ existing programs and the development of new programs may not be
accepted by their students or the online education market, and new programs
could be delayed due to current and future unforeseen regulatory restrictions.
The performance and reliability of the program infrastructure at our schools’
online campuses is critical to the reputation of these campuses and the campuses
ability to attract and retain students. Any computer system error or failure, or
a sudden and significant increase in traffic on our computer networks that host
our schools’ online campuses, may result in the unavailability of our schools’
online campuses’ computer networks. Individual, sustained, or repeated
occurrences could significantly damage the reputation of our schools’ online
campuses and result in a loss of potential or existing students. Additionally,
our schools’ online campuses’ computer systems and operations are vulnerable to
interruption or malfunction due to events beyond our control, including natural
disasters and network and telecommunications failures. Any interruption to our
schools’ online campuses’ computer systems or operations could have a material
adverse effect on the ability of our schools’ online campuses to attract and
retain students.
Our
computer networks—either administrative network or those supporting educational
programs— may also be vulnerable to unauthorized access, computer hackers,
computer viruses, and other security threats. A user who circumvents security
measures could misappropriate proprietary information or cause interruptions or
malfunctions in our operations. Due to the sensitive nature of the information
contained on our networks, such as students’ grades, our networks may be
targeted by hackers. As a result, we may be required to expend significant
resources to protect against the threat of these security breaches or to
alleviate problems caused by these breaches.
We
may not be able to retain our key personnel or hire and retain the personnel we
need to sustain and grow our business.
Our
success has depended, and will continue to depend, largely on the skills,
efforts and motivation of our executive officers who generally have significant
experience within the post-secondary education industry. Our success also
depends in large part upon our ability to attract and retain highly qualified
faculty, school directors, administrators and corporate management. Due to the
nature of our business, we face significant competition in the attraction and
retention of personnel who possess the skill sets that we seek. In addition, key
personnel may leave us and subsequently compete against us. Furthermore, we do
not currently carry "key man" life insurance on any of our employees. The loss
of the services of any of our key personnel, or our failure to attract and
retain other qualified and experienced personnel on acceptable terms, could have
an adverse effect on our ability to operate our business efficiently and to
execute our growth strategy.
If
we are unable to hire, retain and continue to develop and train our employees
responsible for student recruitment, the effectiveness of our student recruiting
efforts would be adversely affected.
In order
to support revenue growth, we need to hire new employees dedicated to student
recruitment and retain and continue to develop and train our current student
recruitment personnel. Our ability to develop a strong student recruiting team
may be affected by a number of factors, including our ability to integrate and
motivate our student recruiters; our ability to effectively train our student
recruiters; the length of time it takes new student recruiters to become
productive; regulatory restrictions on the method of compensating student
recruiters; the competition in hiring and retaining student recruiters; and our
ability to effectively manage a multi-location educational organization. If we
are unable to hire, develop or retain our student recruiters, the effectiveness
of our student recruiting efforts would be adversely affected.
Competition
could decrease our market share and cause us to lower our tuition
rates.
The
post-secondary education market is highly competitive. Our schools compete for
students and faculty with traditional public and private two-year and four-year
colleges and universities and other proprietary schools, many of which have
greater financial resources than we do. Some traditional public and private
colleges and universities, as well as other private career-oriented schools,
offer programs that may be perceived by students to be similar to ours. Most
public institutions are able to charge lower tuition than our schools, due in
part to government subsidies and other financial resources not available to
for-profit schools. Some of our competitors also have substantially greater
financial and other resources than we have which may, among other things, allow
our competitors to secure strategic relationships with some or all of our
existing strategic partners or develop other high profile strategic
relationships, or devote more resources to expanding their programs and their
school network, or provide greater financing alternatives to their students, all
of which could affect the success of our marketing programs. In addition, some
of our competitors have a larger network of schools and campuses than we do,
enabling them to recruit students more effectively from a wider geographic area.
If we are unable to compete effectively with these institutions for students,
our student enrollments and revenues will be adversely
affected.
We may be
required to reduce tuition or increase spending in response to competition in
order to retain or attract students or pursue new market opportunities. As a
result, our market share, revenues and operating margin may be decreased. We
cannot be sure that we will be able to compete successfully against current or
future competitors or that the competitive pressures we face will not adversely
affect our revenues and profitability.
We
may experience business interruptions resulting from natural disasters,
inclement weather, transit disruptions, or other events in one or more of the
geographic areas in which we operate.
We may
experience business interruptions resulting from natural disasters, inclement
weather, transit disruptions, or other events in one or more of the geographic
areas in which we operate. These events could cause us to close schools —
temporarily or permanently — and could affect student recruiting
opportunities in those locations, causing enrollment and revenues to
decline.
Our
financial performance depends in part on our ability to continue to develop
awareness and acceptance of our programs among high school graduates and working
adults looking to return to school.
The
awareness of our programs among high school graduates and working adults looking
to return to school is critical to the continued acceptance and growth of our
programs. Our inability to continue to develop awareness of our programs could
reduce our enrollments and impair our ability to increase our revenues or
maintain profitability. The following are some of the factors that could prevent
us from successfully marketing our programs:
|
·
|
Student dissatisfaction with our
programs and services;
|
|
·
|
Diminished access to high school
student populations;
|
|
·
|
Our failure to maintain or expand
our brand or other factors related to our marketing or advertising
practices; and
|
|
·
|
Our inability to maintain
relationships with automotive, diesel, healthcare, skilled trades and IT,
and spa and culinary manufacturers and
suppliers.
|
If
students fail to pay their outstanding balances, our profitability will be
adversely affected.
We offer
a variety of payment plans to help students pay the portion of their education
expense not covered by financial aid programs. These balances are unsecured and
not guaranteed. As a result of SLM’s tiered discount loan program
termination, effective February 18, 2008, our internal gap financing between
Title IV and tuition will increase. Although we have reserved for
estimated losses related to unpaid student balances, losses in excess of the
amounts we have reserved for bad debts will result in a reduction in our
profitability.
An
increase in interest rates could adversely affect our ability to attract and
retain students.
Interest
rates have reached historical lows in recent years, creating a favorable
borrowing environment for our students. Much of the financing our students
receive is tied to floating interest rates. Increases in interest rates result
in a corresponding increase in the cost to our existing and prospective students
of financing their education which could result in a reduction in the number of
students attending our schools and could adversely affect our results of
operations and revenues. Higher interest rates could also contribute to higher
default rates with respect to our students' repayment of their education loans.
Higher default rates may in turn adversely impact our eligibility for
Title IV Program participation or the willingness of private lenders to
make private loan programs available to students who attend our schools, which
could result in a reduction in our student population.
Seasonal
and other fluctuations in our results of operations could adversely affect the
trading price of our common stock.
Our
results of operations fluctuate as a result of seasonal variations in our
business, principally due to changes in total student population. Student
population varies as a result of new student enrollments, graduations and
student attrition. Historically, our schools have had lower student populations
in our first and second quarters and we have experienced large class starts in
the third and fourth quarters and student attrition in the first half of the
year. Our second half growth is largely dependent on a successful recruiting
season. Our expenses, however, do not vary significantly over the course of the
year with changes in our student population and net revenues. We expect
quarterly fluctuations in results of operations to continue as a result of
seasonal enrollment patterns. Such patterns may change, however, as a result of
acquisitions, new school openings, new program introductions and increased
enrollments of adult students. These fluctuations may result in volatility or
have an adverse effect on the market price of our common stock.
Our
total assets include substantial intangible assets. The write-off of a
significant portion of unamortized intangible assets would negatively affect our
results of operations.
Our total
assets reflect substantial intangible assets. At December 31, 2007, goodwill and
identified intangibles, net, represented approximately 34.5% of total assets.
Intangible assets consist of goodwill and other identified intangible assets
associated with our acquisitions. On at least an annual basis, we assess whether
there has been an impairment in the value of goodwill and other intangible
assets with indefinite lives. If the carrying value of the tested asset exceeds
its estimated fair value, impairment is deemed to have occurred. In this
event, the amount is written down to fair value. Under current accounting
rules, this would result in a charge to operating earnings. Any determination
requiring the write-off of a significant portion of unamortized goodwill and
identified intangible assets would negatively affect our results of operations
and total capitalization, which could be material. Our annual
impairment analysis, performed as of December 31, 2007, did not result in an
impairment charge.
We
cannot predict our future capital needs, and if we are unable to secure
additional financing when needed, our operations and revenues would be adversely
affected.
We may
need to raise additional capital in the future to fund acquisitions, working
capital requirements, expand our markets and program offerings or respond to
competitive pressures or perceived opportunities. We cannot be sure that
additional financing will be available to us on favorable terms, or at all
particularly during times of uncertainty in the financial markets similar to
that which is currently being experienced. If adequate funds are not available
when required or on acceptable terms, we may be forced to forego attractive
acquisition opportunities, cease our operations and, even if we are able to
continue our operations, our ability to increase student enrollments and
revenues would be adversely affected.
Our
schools' failure to comply with environmental laws and regulations governing our
activities could result in financial penalties and other costs which could
adversely impact our results of operations.
We use
hazardous materials at some of our schools and generate small quantities of
waste, such as used oil, antifreeze, paint and car batteries. As a result, our
schools are subject to a variety of environmental laws and regulations
governing, among other things, the use, storage and disposal of solid and
hazardous substances and waste, and the clean-up of contamination at our
facilities or off-site locations to which we send or have sent waste for
disposal. In the event we do not maintain compliance with any of these laws and
regulations, or are responsible for a spill or release of hazardous materials,
we could incur significant costs for clean-up, damages, and fines or penalties
which could adversely impact our results of operations.
Approximately
26% of our schools are concentrated in the states of New Jersey and Pennsylvania
and a change in the general economic or regulatory conditions in these states
could increase our costs and have an adverse effect on our
revenues.
As of
December 31, 2007, we operated 34 campuses in 17 states. Nine of those
schools are located in the states of New Jersey and Pennsylvania. As a result of
this geographic concentration, any material change in general economic
conditions in New Jersey or Pennsylvania could reduce our student enrollment in
our schools located in these states and thereby reduce our revenues. In
addition, the legislatures in the states of New Jersey and/or Pennsylvania could
change the laws in those states or adopt regulations regarding private,
for-profit post-secondary coeducation institutions which could place additional
burdens on us. If we were unable to comply with any such new legislation, we
could be prohibited from operating in those jurisdictions, which could reduce
our revenues.
A
substantial decrease in student financing options, or a significant increase in
financing costs for our students, could have a material adverse affect on our
student population, revenues and financial results.
The
consumer credit markets in the United States have recently suffered from
increases in default rates and foreclosures on mortgages. Adverse
market conditions for consumer and federally guaranteed student loans could
result in providers of alternative loans reducing the attractiveness and/or
decreasing the availability of alternative loans to post-secondary students,
including students with low credit scores who would not otherwise be eligible
for credit-based alternative loans. Prospective students may find that these
increased financing costs make borrowing prohibitively expensive and abandon or
delay enrollment in post-secondary education programs. Private lenders could
also require that we pay them new or increased fees in order to provide
alternative loans to prospective students. If any of these scenarios were to
occur, our students’ ability to finance their education could be adversely
affected and our student population could decrease, which could have a material
adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash
flows.
In 2007,
six lenders provided funding to more than 90% of the students at the schools we
owned. In addition, the primary guarantors for the Title IV loans of
our students are USA Group, a subsidiary of Sallie Mae, and New Jersey Higher
Education Assistance Authority, an independent agency of the State of New
Jersey. These two agencies currently guarantee a majority of the federally
guaranteed student loans made to students enrolled at our schools. There are six
other guaranty agencies that guarantee student loans made to students enrolled
at our schools. While we believe that other lenders may be willing to make
federally guaranteed student loans to our students if loans were no longer
available from our current lenders, and that other guaranty agencies would be
willing to guarantee loans to our students if any of the current guarantee
agencies ceased guaranteeing those loans or reduced the volume of loans they
guarantee, we cannot assure you that we would be successful in locating
alternative lenders or guarantors. If such alternative lenders or
guarantors were not forthcoming, our enrollment and our results of operations
could be materially and adversely affected.
In
January 2008, we received notification that Sallie Mae (SLM) would be
terminating its tiered discount loan program with us effective February 18,
2007. We entered into a tiered discount loan agreement with SLM on
September 1, 2007 under which SLM agreed to provide up to $16 million of private
loans to qualifying students that are non-recourse to us. Under the agreement,
we were required to pay SLM discounts of up to 30% on all loans disbursed,
depending on the credit score of each student participating in the program. The
agreement also stated that SLM would defer funding for these students for 60
days.
Although
no assurance can be given, we believe that SLM's decision to terminate its
tiered discount loan program will have a limited impact on us. Our current
expectations are that students who obtained funding through SLM programs will
continue to have access to funding either through alternative lenders or through
our own internal financing. However, if we opted to no
longer provide financing to our students and/or were unable to obtain other
alternative loan providers, our student population could decrease, which could
have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations
and cash flows.
In
addition, any actions by the U.S. Congress that significantly reduce funding for
Title IV Programs or the ability of our students to participate in these
programs, or establish different or more stringent requirements for our schools
to participate in Title IV Programs, could have a material adverse effect on our
student population, results of operations and cash flows.
Anti-takeover
provisions in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation, our amended
and restated bylaws and New Jersey law could discourage a change of control that
our stockholders may favor, which could negatively affect our stock
price.
Provisions
in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and our amended and
restated bylaws and applicable provisions of the New Jersey Business Corporation
Act may make it more difficult and expensive for a third party to acquire
control of us even if a change of control would be beneficial to the interests
of our stockholders. These provisions could discourage potential takeover
attempts and could adversely affect the market price of our common stock. For
example, applicable provisions of the New Jersey Business Corporation Act may
discourage, delay or prevent a change in control by prohibiting us from engaging
in a business combination with an interested stockholder for a period of five
years after the person becomes an interested stockholder. Furthermore, our
amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated
bylaws:
·
|
authorize the issuance of blank
check preferred stock that could be issued by our board of directors to
thwart a takeover attempt;
|
·
|
prohibit cumulative voting in the
election of directors, which would otherwise allow holders of less than a
majority of stock to elect some
directors;
|
·
|
require super-majority voting to
effect amendments to certain provisions of our amended and restated
certificate of
incorporation;
|
·
|
limit who may call special
meetings of both the board of directors and
stockholders;
|
·
|
prohibit stockholder action by
non-unanimous written consent and otherwise require all stockholder
actions to be taken at a meeting of the
stockholders;
|
·
|
establish advance notice
requirements for nominating candidates for election to the board of
directors or for proposing matters that can be acted upon by stockholders
at stockholders' meetings;
and
|
·
|
require that vacancies on the
board of directors, including newly created directorships, be filled only
by a majority vote of directors then in
office.
|
We
can issue shares of preferred stock without shareholder approval, which could
adversely affect the rights of common stockholders.
Our
amended and restated certificate of incorporation permits us to establish the
rights, privileges, preferences and restrictions, including voting rights, of
future series of our preferred stock and to issue such stock without approval
from our stockholders. The rights of holders of our common stock may suffer as a
result of the rights granted to holders of preferred stock that may be issued in
the future. In addition, we could issue preferred stock to prevent a change in
control of our company, depriving common stockholders of an opportunity to sell
their stock at a price in excess of the prevailing market price.
Our
principal stockholder owns a large percentage of our voting stock which allows
it to control substantially all matters requiring shareholder
approval.
Stonington
Partners Inc. II, or Stonington, our principal stockholder, directly or
indirectly holds approximately 79% of our outstanding shares. Accordingly, it
controls us through its ability to determine the outcome of the election of our
directors, to amend our certificate of incorporation and bylaws and to take
other actions requiring the vote or consent of stockholders, including mergers,
going private transactions and other extraordinary transactions, and the terms
of any of these transactions. The ownership positions of this stockholder may
have the effect of delaying, deterring or preventing a change in control or a
change in the composition of our board of directors. In addition, two members of
our board of directors are partners of Stonington. As a result, Stonington has
an added ability to influence certain matters, such as determining compensation
of our executive officers.
A
disposition by our principal stockholder of all or a significant portion of its
shares of our outstanding stock could impact the market price of our shares and
result in a change of control.
In light
of the termination provisions of its fund agreement, Stonington, our largest
stockholder, is currently considering its options with respect to its investment
in us, including selling its shares of our outstanding common stock, in one or
more transactions, over the next 12 to 24 months. A sale by Stonington of all or
a significant portion of its shares of our outstanding common stock, whether to
a single buyer, through open market sales or otherwise, could cause the price of
our common stock to decline. Such a sale could also result in a change of
control under the standards of the DOE and applicable state education agencies
and accrediting commissions. See “Business - Change of Control” and “Risk
Factors -- Risks Related to Our Industry.”
ITEM 1B.
|
UNRESOLVED STAFF
COMMENTS
|
None.
We lease
all of our facilities, except for our West Palm Beach, Florida campus, our
Nashville, Tennessee campus, our Grand Prairie, Texas campus and our Cincinnati
(Tri-County) campus, which we own. Four of our facilities (Union, New Jersey;
Allentown, Pennsylvania; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; and Grand Prairie, Texas)
are also accounted for by us under a finance lease obligation. We continue to
re-evaluate our facilities to maximize our facility utilization and efficiency
and to allow us to introduce new programs and attract more students. All of our
existing leases expire between March 2008 and August 2023. On January 1,
2008, we increased our square footage at our Brockton, Massachusetts campus by
approximately 13,000 square feet.
The
following table provides information relating to our facilities as of
December 31, 2007, including our corporate office:
Location
|
|
Brand
|
|
Approximate
Square Footage
|
Union,
New Jersey
|
|
Lincoln
Technical Institute
|
|
56,000
|
Mahwah,
New Jersey
|
|
Lincoln
Technical Institute
|
|
79,000
|
Allentown,
Pennsylvania
|
|
Lincoln
Technical Institute
|
|
26,000
|
Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania
|
|
Lincoln
Technical Institute
|
|
30,000
|
Columbia,
Maryland
|
|
Lincoln
Technical Institute
|
|
110,000
|
Grand
Prairie, Texas
|
|
Lincoln
Technical Institute
|
|
146,000
|
Queens,
New York
|
|
Lincoln
Technical Institute
|
|
48,000
|
Edison,
New Jersey
|
|
Lincoln
Technical Institute
|
|
64,000
|
Mt.
Laurel, New Jersey
|
|
Lincoln
Technical Institute
|
|
26,000
|
Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania
|
|
Lincoln
Technical Institute
|
|
29,000
|
Northeast
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
|
|
Lincoln
Technical Institute
|
|
25,000
|
Plymouth
Meeting, Pennsylvania*
|
|
Lincoln
Technical Institute
|
|
30,000
|
Paramus,
New Jersey
|
|
Lincoln
Technical Institute
|
|
27,000
|
Brockton,
Massachusetts
|
|
Lincoln
Technical Institute
|
|
10,000
|
Lincoln,
Rhode Island
|
|
Lincoln
Technical Institute
|
|
59,000
|
Lowell,
Massachusetts
|
|
Lincoln
Technical Institute
|
|
20,000
|
Somerville,
Massachusetts
|
|
Lincoln
Technical Institute
|
|
33,000
|
New
Britain, Connecticut
|
|
Lincoln
Technical Institute
|
|
47,000
|
Cromwell,
Connecticut
|
|
Lincoln
Technical Institute
|
|
12,000
|
Hamden,
Connecticut
|
|
Lincoln
Technical Institute
|
|
14,000
|
Shelton,
Connecticut
|
|
Lincoln
Technical Institute
|
|
41,600
|
Indianapolis,
Indiana
|
|
Lincoln College
of Technology
|
|
189,000
|
Melrose
Park, Illinois
|
|
Lincoln College
of Technology
|
|
67,000
|
Denver,
Colorado
|
|
Lincoln College
of Technology
|
|
78,000
|
Norcross,
Georgia*
|
|
Lincoln College
of Technology
|
|
27,000
|
Marietta,
Georgia
|
|
Lincoln College
of Technology
|
|
30,000
|
Henderson,
Nevada*
|
|
Lincoln College
of Technology
|
|
27,000
|
West
Palm Beach, Florida
|
|
Lincoln College of Technology and Florida Culinary Institute
|
|
117,000
|
Nashville,
Tennessee
|
|
Nashville Auto-Diesel College
|
|
278,000
|
Dayton,
Ohio
|
|
Southwestern
College
|
|
11,000
|
Franklin,
Ohio
|
|
Southwestern
College
|
|
14,000
|
Cincinnati,
Ohio
|
|
Southwestern
College
|
|
12,000
|
Cincinnati
(Tri-County), Ohio
|
|
Southwestern
College
|
|
31,000
|
Florence,
Kentucky
|
|
Southwestern
College
|
|
11,000
|
Las
Vegas, Nevada
|
|
Euphoria
Institute
|
|
13,000
|
Henderson,
Nevada
|
|
Euphoria
Institute
|
|
20,000
|
North
Las Vegas, Nevada
|
|
Euphoria
Institute
|
|
12,000
|
West
Orange, New Jersey
|
|
Corporate
Office
|
|
41,000
|
*
Operations at these campuses have ceased as of September 30, 2007.
We
believe that our facilities are suitable for their present intended
purposes.
In the
ordinary conduct of our business, we are subject to periodic lawsuits,
investigations and claims, including, but not limited to, claims involving
students or graduates and routine employment matters. Although we cannot predict
with certainty the ultimate resolution of lawsuits, investigations and claims
asserted against us, we do not believe that any currently pending legal
proceeding to which we are a party will have a material adverse effect on our
business, financial condition, results of operation or cash flows.
ITEM 4.
|
SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS
|
There
were no matters submitted to a vote of security holders, through the
solicitation of proxies or otherwise, during the fourth quarter of
2007.
PART
II.
ITEM 5.
|
MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER
MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY
SECURITIES
|
Market
for our Common Stock
Our
common stock is quoted on the Nasdaq Global Market under the symbol
“LINC”.
The
following table sets forth the range of high and low sales prices per share for
our common stock, as reported by the Nasdaq Global Market, for the periods
indicated:
|
|
Price
Range of Common Stock
|
|
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
Fiscal
Year Ended December 31, 2007:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First
Quarter
|
|
$ |
14.21 |
|
|
$ |
11.58 |
|
Second
Quarter
|
|
$ |
15.79 |
|
|
$ |
13.64 |
|
Third
Quarter
|
|
$ |
15.60 |
|
|
$ |
12.56 |
|
Fourth
Quarter
|
|
$ |
15.43 |
|
|
$ |
13.10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Price
Range of Common Stock
|
|
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
Fiscal
Year Ended December 31, 2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First
Quarter
|
|
$ |
17.28 |
|
|
$ |
14.25 |
|
Second
Quarter
|
|
$ |
17.09 |
|
|
$ |
15.42 |
|
Third
Quarter
|
|
$ |
18.25 |
|
|
$ |
16.33 |
|
Fourth
Quarter
|
|
$ |
17.06 |
|
|
$ |
12.14 |
|
On March
13, 2008, the last reported sale price of our common stock on the Nasdaq Global
Market was $12.64 per share. As of March 13, 2008, based on the information
provided by Continental Stock Transfer & Trust Company, there were
approximately 21 stockholders of record of our common stock.
Dividend
Policy
No cash
dividends were declared or paid in 2007. We anticipate retaining all available
funds to finance future internal growth. Payment of future cash dividends, if
any, will be at the discretion of our board of directors after taking into
account various factors, including our financial condition, operating results,
current and anticipated cash needs and plans for expansion.
Stock
Performance Graph
This
stock performance graph compares the Company’s total cumulative stockholder
return on its common stock during the period from June 23, 2005 (the date on
which our common stock first traded on the Nasdaq Global Market) through
December 31, 2007 with the cumulative return on the Russell 2000 Index and a
Peer Issuer Group Index. The peer issuer group consists of the companies
identified below, which were selected on the basis of the similar nature of
their business. The graph assumes that $100 was invested on June 23, 2005, and
any dividends were reinvested on the date on which they were paid.
The
information provided under the heading "Stock Performance Graph" shall not be
considered "filed" for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 or incorporated by reference in any filing under the Securities Act of 1933
or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, except to the extent that the Company
specifically incorporates it by reference into a filing.
Companies
in the Peer Group include Apollo Group, Inc., Corinthian Colleges, Inc., Career
Education Corp., DeVry, Inc., Education Management Corporation, ITT Educational
Services, Inc., Strayer Education, Inc. and Universal Technical Institute,
Inc.
Securities
Authorized for Issuance under Equity Compensation Plans
The
Company has various equity compensation plans under which equity securities are
authorized for issuance. Information regarding these securities as of
December 31, 2007 is as follows:
Plan
Category
|
|
Number
of
Securities
to
be
issued
upon
exercise
of
outstanding
options,
warrants
and
rights
|
|
|
Weighted-
average
exercise
price
of
outstanding
options,
warrants
and
rights
|
|
|
Number
of
securities
remaining
available
for
future
issuance
under
equity
compensation
plans
(excluding
securities
reflected
in
column
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity
compensation plans approved by security holders
|
|
|
1,512,163 |
|
|
$ |
9.65 |
|
|
|
793,859 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity
compensation plans not approved by security
holders
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Total
|
|
|
1,512,163 |
|
|
$ |
9.65 |
|
|
|
793,859 |
|
SELECTED
FINANCIAL INFORMATION
The
following table sets forth our selected historical consolidated financial and
operating data as of the dates and for the periods indicated. You should read
these data together with Item 7 - "Management's Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations" and our consolidated financial
statements and the notes thereto included in Part II. Item 8 of this filing. The
selected historical consolidated statement of operations data for each of the
years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2007 and historical
consolidated balance sheet data at December 31, 2007 and 2006 have been
derived from our audited consolidated financial statements which are included
elsewhere in this Form 10-K. The selected historical consolidated statements of
operations data for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003 and
historical consolidated balance sheet data as of December 31, 2005, 2004
and 2003 have been derived from our audited consolidated financial information
not included in this Form 10-K. Our historical results are not necessarily
indicative of our future results.
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
|
(In
thousands, except per share amounts)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Statement
of Operations Data, Year Ended December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$ |
327,774 |
|
|
$ |
310,630 |
|
|
$ |
287,368 |
|
|
$ |
248,508 |
|
|
$ |
187,488 |
|
Cost
and expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Educational
services and facilities (1)
|
|
|
139,500 |
|
|
|
129,311 |
|
|
|
114,161 |
|
|
|
97,439 |
|
|
|
78,610 |
|
Selling,
general and administrative (2)
|
|
|
162,396 |
|
|
|
151,136 |
|
|
|
138,125 |
|
|
|
124,034 |
|
|
|
92,228 |
|
(Gain)
loss on sale of assets
|
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
|
(435 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
368 |
|
|
|
(22 |
) |
Total
costs and expenses
|
|
|
301,881 |
|
|
|
280,012 |
|
|
|
252,279 |
|
|
|
221,841 |
|
|
|
170,816 |
|
Operating
income
|
|
|
25,893 |
|
|
|
30,618 |
|
|
|
35,089 |
|
|
|
26,667 |
|
|
|
16,672 |
|
Other:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain
on sale of securities
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
211 |
|
Interest
income
|
|
|
180 |
|
|
|
981 |
|
|
|
775 |
|
|
|
104 |
|
|
|
133 |
|
Interest
expense (3)
|
|
|
(2,341 |
) |
|
|
(2,291 |
) |
|
|
(2,892 |
) |
|
|
(3,002 |
) |
|
|
(2,745 |
) |
Other
(loss) income
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
(132 |
) |
|
|
243 |
|
|
|
42 |
|
|
|
307 |
|
Income
from continuing operations before income taxes
|
|
|
23,759 |
|
|
|
29,176 |
|
|
|
33,215 |
|
|
|
23,811 |
|
|
|
14,578 |
|
Provision
for income taxes
|
|
|
9,932 |
|
|
|
12,092 |
|
|
|
12,931 |
|
|
|
9,904 |
|
|
|
5,751 |
|
Income
from continuing operations
|
|
|
13,827 |
|
|
|
17,084 |
|
|
|
20,284 |
|
|
|
13,907 |
|
|
|
8,827 |
|
Loss
from discontinued operations, net of income taxes
|
|
|
(5,487 |
) |
|
|
(1,532 |
) |
|
|
(1,575 |
) |
|
|
(929 |
) |
|
|
(608 |
) |
Net
income
|
|
$ |
8,340 |
|
|
$ |
15,552 |
|
|
$ |
18,709 |
|
|
$ |
12,978 |
|
|
$ |
8,219 |
|
Basic
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings
per share from continuing operations
|
|
$ |
0.54 |
|
|
$ |
0.67 |
|
|
$ |
0.86 |
|
|
$ |
0.64 |
|
|
$ |
0.41 |
|
Loss
per share from discontinued operations
|
|
|
(0.21 |
) |
|
|
(0.06 |
) |
|
|
(0.06 |
) |
|
|
(0.04 |
) |
|
|
(0.03 |
) |
Net
income per share
|
|
$ |
0.33 |
|
|
$ |
0.61 |
|
|
$ |
0.80 |
|
|
$ |
0.60 |
|
|
$ |
0.38 |
|
Diluted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings
per share from continuing operations
|
|
$ |
0.53 |
|
|
$ |
0.65 |
|
|
$ |
0.83 |
|
|
$ |
0.60 |
|
|
$ |
0.39 |
|
Loss
per share from discontinued operations
|
|
|
(0.21 |
) |
|
|
(0.05 |
) |
|
|
(0.07 |
) |
|
|
(0.04 |
) |
|
|
(0.02 |
) |
Net
income per share
|
|
$ |
0.32 |
|
|
$ |
0.60 |
|
|
$ |
0.76 |
|
|
$ |
0.56 |
|
|
$ |
0.37 |
|
Weighted
average number of common shares outstanding:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
25,479 |
|
|
|
25,336 |
|
|
|
23,475 |
|
|
|
21,676 |
|
|
|
21,667 |
|
Diluted
|
|
|
26,090 |
|
|
|
26,086 |
|
|
|
24,503 |
|
|
|
23,095 |
|
|
|
22,364 |
|
Other
Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital
expenditures
|
|
$ |
24,766 |
|
|
$ |
19,341 |
|
|
$ |
22,621 |
|
|
$ |
23,813 |
|
|
$ |
13,154 |
|
Depreciation
and amortization from continuing operations
|
|
|
15,111 |
|
|
|
13,829 |
|
|
|
12,099 |
|
|
|
9,870 |
|
|
|
9,166 |
|
Number
of campuses
|
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
Average
student population
|
|
|
17,687 |
|
|
|
17,397 |
|
|
|
17,064 |
|
|
|
15,401 |
|
|
|
11,771 |
|
Balance
Sheet Data, At December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
|
$ |
3,502 |
|
|
$ |
6,461 |
|
|
$ |
50,257 |
|
|
$ |
41,445 |
|
|
$ |
48,965 |
|
Working
(deficit) capital (4)
|
|
|
(17,952 |
) |
|
|
(20,943 |
) |
|
|
8,531 |
|
|
|
4,570 |
|
|
|
13,402 |
|
Total
assets
|
|
|
246,183 |
|
|
|
226,216 |
|
|
|
214,792 |
|
|
|
162,729 |
|
|
|
139,355 |
|
Total
debt (5)
|
|
|
15,378 |
|
|
|
9,860 |
|
|
|
10,768 |
|
|
|
46,829 |
|
|
|
43,060 |
|
Total
stockholders' equity
|
|
|
162,467 |
|
|
|
151,783 |
|
|
|
135,990 |
|
|
|
58,086 |
|
|
|
42,924 |
|
(1) Educational
services and facilities expenses include a charge of $0.2 million for the year
ended December 31, 2005 related to catch-up depreciation resulting from the
reclassification of our property in Indianapolis, Indiana from property held for
sale to property, equipment and facilities as of September 30,
2005.
(2) Selling,
general and administrative expenses include (a) a $2.1 million charge
for the year ended December 31, 2004 to give effect to the one-time
write-off of deferred offering costs, (b) compensation costs of
approximately $1.8 million, $1.4 million, $1.3 million, $1.8 million
and $0.8 million for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006, 2005,
2004 and 2003, respectively, related to the adoption of SFAS No. 123R,
"Share Based Payment," (c) a $0.7 million one-time non-cash charge for
the year ended December 31, 2004 related to the timing of rent expense for
our schools during the period of construction of leasehold improvements and to
align the depreciation lives of our leasehold improvements to the terms of our
noncancellable leases, including renewal options, (d) a $0.5 million write-off
for the year ended December 31, 2005 resulting from our decision not to purchase
the site we had considered for expansion of our facility in Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania, and (e) $0.9 million of re-branding cost for the year ended
December 31, 2006.
(3) Interest
expense includes a $0.4 million non-cash charge for the year ended
December 31, 2005 resulting from the write-off of deferred finance costs
under our previous credit agreement.
(4) Working
(deficit) capital is defined as current assets less current
liabilities.
(5) Total
debt consists of long-term debt including current portion, capital leases, auto
loans and a finance obligation of $9.7 million for each of the years in the
five-year period ended December 31, 2007 incurred in connection with a
sale-leaseback transaction as further described in Note 9 to the
consolidated financial statements included in Part II. Item 8 of this Form
10-K.
ITEM 7.
|
MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND
ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
|
You
should read the following discussion together with the “Selected Financial
Data,” “Forward Looking Statements” and the consolidated financial statements
and the related notes thereto included elsewhere in this Form 10-K. This
discussion contains forward-looking statements that are based on management’s
current expectations, estimates and projections about our business and
operations. Our actual results may differ materially from those currently
anticipated and expressed in such forward-looking statements as a result of a
number of factors, including those we discuss under “Risk Factors,” “Forward
Looking Statements” and elsewhere in this Form 10-K.
GENERAL
We are a
leading and diversified for-profit provider of career-oriented post-secondary
education. We offer recent high school graduates and working adults degree and
diploma programs in five areas of study: automotive technology, health sciences,
skilled trades, business and information technology and spa and culinary. Each
area of study is specifically designed to appeal to and meet the educational
objectives of our student population, while also satisfying the criteria
established by industry and employers. The resulting diversification limits
dependence on any one industry for enrollment growth or placement opportunities
and broadens potential branches for introducing new programs. As of December 31,
2007, we enrolled 18,013 students at our 34 campuses across 17 states. Our
campuses primarily attract students from their local communities and surrounding
areas, although our five destination schools attract students from across the
United States, and in some cases, from abroad.
In 2007,
we completed our re-branding initiative. As a result, 26 of our 34 campuses
nationwide operate under the Lincoln name. In addition to Lincoln College
Online, we operate our campuses under brands: Lincoln Technical Institute,
Lincoln College of Technology, Nashville Auto-Diesel College (NADC),
Southwestern College and Euphoria. Lincoln’s Cittone Institute schools in
New Jersey and Pennsylvania as well as the Massachusetts and Rhode Island Career
Education Institute (CEI) schools were re-branded as Lincoln Technical
Institute. The West Palm Beach campuses (Formerly New England Institute of
Technology), Marietta, Georgia, Norcross, Georgia, and Henderson, Nevada
campuses (formerly Career Education Institute - CEI), the Connecticut campuses
(formerly New England Technical Institute, or NETI) and Denver, Colorado, were
re-branded Lincoln College of Technology.
From 1999
through December 31, 2007, we increased our geographic footprint and added
17 additional schools through our acquisitions of: Denver Automotive &
Diesel College in 2000 (one school), Career Education Institute in 2001 (two
schools), Nashville Auto-Diesel College in 2003 (one school), Southwestern
College in 2004 (five schools), New England Technical Institute (four schools)
in January 2005, Euphoria Institute of Beauty Arts and Sciences (two schools) in
December 2005 and New England Institute of Technology at Palm Beach, Inc. in May
2006 (two schools). Our campuses, a majority of which serve major metropolitan
markets, are located throughout the United States. Five of our campuses are
destination schools, which attract students from across the United States and,
in some cases, from abroad. Our other campuses primarily attract students from
their local communities and surrounding areas. All of our schools are nationally
accredited and are eligible to participate in federal financial aid programs. In
connection with each of our acquisitions of Southwestern College, New England
Technical Institute, and New England Institute of Technology at Palm Beach, we
received an executed provisional program participation agreement in connection
with the acquisition, from the DOE.
Our
revenues consist primarily of student tuition and fees derived from the programs
we offer. Our revenues are reduced by any scholarships granted to our
students. We recognize revenues from tuition and one-time fees, such as
application fees, ratably over the length of a program, including internships or
externships that take place prior to graduation. We also earn revenues from our
bookstores, dormitories, cafeterias and contract training services. These
non-tuition revenues are recognized upon delivery of goods or as services are
performed and represent less than 10% of our revenues.
Tuition
varies by school and by program and on average we increase tuition once a year
by 2% to 5%. Our ability to raise tuition is influenced by the demand for our
programs and by the rate of tuition increase at other post-secondary schools. If
historical trends continue, we expect to be able to continue to raise tuition
annually at comparable rates.
We have
historically enjoyed revenue growth as a result of strategic acquisitions
coupled with organic growth. We have enjoyed organic growth every
year except for 2006. Our revenues increased 5.5% in 2007 and 8.1% in
2006, over the prior years as we grew from 32 campuses at December 31, 2005
to 34 campuses at December 31, 2007. Our average student population
increased from 17,064 for the year ended December 31, 2005 to 17,687 for
the year ended December 31, 2007. While we expect to increase our revenues
and enrollments in the foreseeable future as a result of both organic growth and
strategic acquisitions, we can give no assurance as to our ability to continue
to increase our revenues at historical rates and expect our rate of revenue
increases to moderate over time as we become a larger and more mature
company.
Our
operating expenses, while also a function of our revenue growth, contain a high
fixed cost component. Our educational services and facilities expenses and
selling, general and administrative expenses as a percentage of revenue
increased in 2007 from 2006 levels as we experienced lower student enrollments
in the first half of 2007 and thus lower capacity utilization across our
schools. Our educational services and facilities expenses as a percentage of
revenues increased to 42.6% in 2007 from 41.6% in 2006 and 39.7% in 2005, and
selling, general and administrative expenses increased as a percentage of
revenue to 49.5% in 2007 from 48.7% in 2006 and 48.1% in 2005. We expect that in
the future these expenses will decline slightly as a percentage of revenues as
we achieve better operating efficiencies and utilization at our
schools.
Our
revenues are directly dependent on our average number of students enrolled and
the courses in which they are enrolled. Our enrollment is influenced by the
number of new students starting, re-entering, graduating and withdrawing from
our schools. In addition, our programs range from 14 to 105 weeks and students
attend classes for different amounts of time per week depending on the school
and program in which they are enrolled. Because we start new students every
month, our total student population changes monthly. The number of students
enrolling or re-entering our programs each month is driven by the demand for our
programs, the effectiveness of our marketing and advertising, the availability
of financial aid and other sources of funding, the number of recent high school
graduates, the job market and seasonality. Our retention and graduation rates
are influenced by the quality and commitment of our teachers and student
services personnel, the effectiveness of our programs, the placement rate and
success of our graduates and the availability of financial aid. Although similar
courses have comparable tuition rates, the tuition rates vary among our numerous
programs. As more of our schools receive approval to offer associate degree
programs, which are longer than our diploma degree programs, we would expect our
average enrollments and the average length of stay of our students to
increase.
The
majority of students enrolled at our schools rely on funds received under
various government-sponsored student financial aid programs to pay a substantial
portion of their tuition and other education-related expenses. The largest of
these programs are Title IV Programs which represented approximately 80% of our
cash receipts relating to revenues in 2007.
We extend
credit for tuition and fees to many of our students that are in attendance in
our campuses. Our credit risk is mitigated through the student’s participation
in federally funded financial aid programs unless students withdraw prior to the
receipt by us of Title IV funds for those students. Under Title IV programs, the
government funds a certain portion of a students’ tuition, with the remainder,
referred to as “the gap,” financed by students themselves under private party
loans, including credit extended by us. The gap amount has continued to increase
over the last several years as we have raised tuition on average for the last
several years by 2% to 5% per year, while funds received from Title IV programs
have remained constant. Thus, a significant number of students are required to
finance amounts that could be as much as $14,000 per year.
We
entered into an agreement, effective March 28, 2005 to June 30, 2006, with SLM
Financial Corporation (SLM) to provide up to $6.0 million of private recourse
loans to qualifying students. Under the recourse loan agreement, we
were required to fund 30% of all loans disbursed into a SLM reserve
account. During the term of the agreement, $4.9 million of loans were
disbursed, resulting in $1.5 million of bad debt expense. Funding under
the private recourse loan agreement was classified as bad debt expense included
in selling, general and administrative expenses in our financial
statements. For the year ended December 31, 2007, no loans were
disbursed under this program.
We
entered into a tiered discount loan program agreement, effective September 1,
2007, with SLM to provide up to $16.0 million of private non-recourse loans to
qualifying students. Under this agreement, we were required to pay
SLM either 20% or 30% of all loans disbursed, depending on each student
borrower’s credit score. We were billed at the beginning of each
month based on loans disbursed during the prior month. For the year ended
December 31, 2007, $0.4 million of loans were disbursed, resulting in a $0.1
million loss on sale of receivables. Loss on sale of receivables is
included in selling, general and administrative expenses in our financial
statements.
In
January 2008, SLM notified us that it was terminating its tiered discount loan
program, effective February 18, 2008. It is our understanding that
SLM has also terminated its tiered discount loan programs for our peer
companies. The College Cost Reduction & Access Act, which was signed into
law in September 2007, cut approximately $22 billion in subsidies to federal
student lenders and guarantors as an offset to increases in federal financial
aid. This resulted in significant changes to the terms that
alternative lending providers including SLM were willing to make and resulted in
the termination of the tiered discount loan programs described
above. As a result of the costs associated with these programs and,
in anticipation of additional changes, we concluded that the cost of using the
tiered discount loan program was too high and would lead to significant margin
erosion over time and that we would be better served by financing the gap
between Title IV and tuition internally, while also examining other alternative
loan sources.
We
believe that SLM’s decision to terminate its tiered discount loan program will
have a limited impact on our business. Our current expectations are
that students who previously received funding through the program will continue
to have access to funding either through alternative lenders or through our own
internal financing.
The
additional financing that we are providing to students may expose us to greater
credit risk and can impact our liquidity. We believe that
these risks are however somewhat mitigated due to:
|
·
|
Annual
federal Title IV loan limits, including grants have
increased. Title IV funds represented 80% of our 2007 revenue
on a cash basis;
|
|
·
|
Our
internal financing is provided to students only after all other funding
resources have been exhausted; thus, by the time this funding is
available, students have completed approximately two-thirds of their
curriculum and are more likely to
graduate;
|
|
·
|
Funding
for students who interrupt their education is typically covered by Title
IV funds as long as they have been properly packaged for financial aid;
and
|
|
·
|
We
have an excellent collection history with our
graduates. Historically, 91% of all graduates have repaid their
balances in full.
|
For the
year ended December 31, 2007, approximately 80% of our revenue on a cash basis
was derived from Title IV funds, approximately13% was derived from state grants
and cash payments made by students, and approximately 7% was funded under
third-party private loan programs, which include SLM programs. Of the
private loan programs funded during 2007, approximately 4.6% would be considered
sub-prime loans. The credit crisis that has impacted the financial
markets is expected to have a limited impact on our ability to continue to
finance our credit worthy students. There are a number of lenders
that will finance the Title IV funds or alternatively we may choose to finance
Title IV funds directly with the government under the government’s Direct Loan
Program. Additionally, we have several alternative lenders that will
provide private party loans to credit worthy students. Assuming that
our historical trends continue, we expect thatour credit risk exposure will be
limited to approximately 4% to 5% of revenue on a cash basis.
As a
result of the above, during 2007 our bad debt expense as a percentage of
revenues increased to 5.3% from 4.9% and 3.7%, respectively, in 2006 and
2005.
All
institutions participating in Title IV Programs must satisfy specific standards
of financial responsibility. The DOE evaluates institutions for compliance with
these standards each year, based on the institution’s annual audited financial
statements, as well as following a change in ownership resulting in a change of
control of the institution.
Based on audited financial statements
for the 2007, 2006 and 2005 fiscal years our calculations result in a composite
score of 1.8, 1.7 and 2.5,
respectively. Beginning December 30, 2004 and for a period of three
years
thereafter, all of our
institutions were placed on "Heightened Cash Monitoring, Type 1 status." As a
result, we were subject to a less favorable Title IV fund payment system that
required us to credit student accounts before drawing down Title IV funds and
also required us to timely notify the DOE with respect to certain enumerated
oversight and financial events. The DOE has notified us that, as of December
31, 2007, we are no longer
subject to Heightened Cash Monitoring, Type 1 Status.
The
operating expenses associated with an existing school do not increase
proportionally as the number of students enrolled at the school increases. We
categorize our operating expenses as (1) educational services and
facilities and (2) selling, general and administrative.
|
·
|
Major components of educational
services and facilities expenses include faculty compensation and
benefits, expenses of books and tools, facility rent, maintenance,
utilities, depreciation and amortization of property and equipment used in
the provision of education services and other costs directly associated
with teaching our programs and providing educational services to our
students.
|
|
·
|
Selling, general and
administrative expenses include compensation and benefits of employees who
are not directly associated with the provision of educational services
(such as executive management and school management, finance and central
accounting, legal, human resources and business development), marketing
and student enrollment expenses (including compensation and benefits of
personnel employed in sales and marketing and student admissions), costs
to develop curriculum, costs of professional services, bad debt expense,
rent for our corporate headquarters, depreciation and amortization of
property and equipment that is not used in the provision of educational
services and other costs that are incidental to our operations. All
marketing and student enrollment expenses are recognized in the period
incurred.
|
We use
advertising to attract a substantial portion of our yearly student enrollments.
While we utilize a mix of different advertising mediums, including television,
internet and direct mail, we rely heavily on television advertising. The cost of
television advertising has been increasing faster than the pace of student
tuition increases and the cost of living index. Continued increases in the cost
of television advertising may have a material impact on our operating
margins.
During
the third quarter of 2007, we completed the roll-out of our new student
management and reporting system to all of our campuses. We believe that our
student management and reporting system will improve services to students and
our ability to integrate new schools into our operations, if and when new
schools are opened or acquired. The costs associated with the implementation of
this new system are included in selling, general and administrative expenses and
were approximately $0.6 million, $0.4 million and $1.8 million, respectively,
for the three years ended December 31, 2007.
Costs
related to developing and starting-up new facilities are expensed as incurred.
Costs related to our start up facility in Queens, New York, which opened March
27, 2006, were approximately $0.9 million and $1.6 million, for 2006 and
2005.
DISCONTINUED
OPERATIONS
On July
31, 2007, our Board of Directors approved a plan to cease operations at our
Plymouth Meeting, Pennsylvania, Norcross, Georgia and Henderson, Nevada
campuses. As a result, we reviewed the related goodwill and
long-lived assets for possible impairment in accordance with SFAS No. 142,
“Goodwill and Other Intangible
Assets,” and SFAS No. 144, “Accounting for the Impairment or
Disposal of Long-Lived Assets.”
As of
September 30, 2007, all operations had ceased at these campuses and,
accordingly, the results of operations of these campuses have been reflected in
the accompanying statements of operations as “Discontinued Operations” for all
periods presented.
The
results of operations at these three campuses for each of the three year period
ended December 31, 2007 were comprised of the following (in
thousands):
|
|
Year
Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
Revenue
|
|
$ |
4,230 |
|
|
$ |
10,876 |
|
|
$ |
11,853 |
|
Operating
expenses
|
|
|
(13,760 |
) |
|
|
(13,493 |
) |
|
|
(14,432 |
) |
|
|
|
(9,530 |
) |
|
|
(2,617 |
) |
|
|
(2,579 |
) |
Benefit
for income taxes
|
|
|
(4,043 |
) |
|
|
(1,085 |
) |
|
|
(1,004 |
) |
Loss
from discontinued operations
|
|
$ |
(5,487 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,532 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,575 |
) |
ACQUISITIONS
Acquisitions
have been, and will continue to be, a component of our growth strategy. We have
a team of professionals who conduct financial, operational and regulatory due
diligence as well as a team that integrates acquisitions with our policies,
procedures and systems.
On May
22, 2006, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company, acquired all of the
outstanding common stock of New England Institute of Technology at Palm Beach,
Inc., or FLA, for approximately $40.1 million. The purchase price was $32.9
million, net of cash acquired plus the assumption of a mortgage note for $7.2
million. The FLA purchase price has been allocated to identifiable net assets
with the excess of the purchase price over the estimated fair value of the net
assets acquired recorded as goodwill.
On
December 1, 2005, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company acquired all of the
rights, title and interest in the assets of Euphoria Institute LLC, or EUP, for
approximately $9.2 million, net of cash acquired.
On
January 11, 2005, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company acquired all of the
rights, title and interest in the assets of New England Technical Institute, or
NETI, for approximately $18.8 million, net of cash acquired.
CRITICAL ACCOUNTING POLICIES
AND ESTIMATES
Our
discussions of our financial condition and results of operations are based upon
our consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance
with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America,
or GAAP. The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP
requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported
amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and
liabilities at the date of the consolidated financial statements and the
reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the period. On an ongoing
basis, we evaluate our estimates and assumptions, including those related to
revenue recognition, bad debts, fixed assets, goodwill and other intangible
assets, income taxes and certain accruals. Actual results could differ from
those estimates. The critical accounting policies discussed herein are not
intended to be a comprehensive list of all of our accounting policies. In many
cases, the accounting treatment of a particular transaction is specifically
dictated by GAAP and does not result in significant management judgment in the
application of such principles. There are also areas in which management's
judgment in selecting any available alternative would not produce a materially
different result from the result derived from the application of our critical
accounting policies. We believe that the following accounting policies are most
critical to us in that they represent the primary areas where financial
information is subject to the application of management's estimates, assumptions
and judgment in the preparation of our consolidated financial
statements.
Revenue
recognition. Revenues are derived primarily from
programs taught at our schools. Tuition revenues and one-time fees, such as
nonrefundable application fees, and course material fees are recognized on a
straight-line basis over the length of the applicable program, which is the
period of time from a student's start date through his or her graduation date,
including internships or externships that take place prior to graduation. If a
student withdraws from a program prior to a specified date, any paid but
unearned tuition is refunded. Refunds are calculated and paid in accordance with
federal, state and accrediting agency standards. Other revenues, such as
textbook sales, tool sales and contract training revenues are recognized as
services are performed or goods are delivered. On an individual student basis,
tuition earned in excess of cash received is recorded as accounts receivable,
and cash received in excess of tuition earned is recorded as unearned
tuition.
Allowance for
uncollectible accounts. Based upon experience and
judgment, we establish an allowance for uncollectible accounts with respect to
tuition receivables. We use an internal group of collectors, augmented by
third-party collectors as deemed appropriate, in our collection efforts. In
establishing our allowance for uncollectible accounts, we consider, among other
things, a student's status (in-school or out-of-school), whether or not
additional financial aid funding will be collected from Title IV Programs or
other sources, whether or not a student is currently making payments, and
overall collection history. Changes in trends in any of these areas may impact
the allowance for uncollectible accounts. The receivables balances of withdrawn
students with delinquent obligations are reserved for based on our collection
history. Although we believe that our reserves are adequate, if the financial
condition of our students deteriorates, resulting in an impairment of their
ability to make payments, additional allowances may be necessary, which will
result in increased selling, general and administrative expenses in the period
such determination is made.
Our bad
debt expense as a percentage of revenues for the years ended December 31,
2007, 2006 and 2005 was 5.3%, 4.9% and 3.7%, respectively. Our exposure to
changes in our bad debt expense could impact our operations. A 1% increase in
our bad debt expense as a percentage of revenues for the years ended
December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005 would have resulted in an increase in bad
debt expense of $3.3 million, $3.1 million and $2.9 million,
respectively.
Because a
substantial portion of our revenues is derived from Title IV Programs, any
legislative or regulatory action that significantly reduces the funding
available under Title IV Programs or the ability of our students or schools to
participate in Title IV Programs could have a material effect on the
realizability of our receivables.
Goodwill. We
test our goodwill for impairment annually, or whenever events or changes in
circumstances indicate an impairment may have occurred, by comparing its fair
value to its carrying value. Impairment may result from, among other things,
deterioration in the performance of the acquired business, adverse market
conditions, adverse changes in applicable laws or regulations, including changes
that restrict the activities of the acquired business, and a variety of other
circumstances. If we determine that impairment has occurred, we are required to
record a write-down of the carrying value and charge the impairment as an
operating expense in the period the determination is made. In evaluating the
recoverability of the carrying value of goodwill and other indefinite-lived
intangible assets, we must make assumptions regarding estimated future cash
flows and other factors to determine the fair value of the acquired assets.
Changes in strategy or market conditions could significantly impact these
judgments in the future and require an adjustment to the recorded
balances.
As
discussed in “Discontinued Operations” above, as a result of a decision to close
three of our campuses we conducted a review of our goodwill as of June 30,
2007. In connection with that review, we recognized a non-cash
impairment charge of approximately $2.1 million as of June 30,
2007. Goodwill represents a significant portion of our total assets.
As of December 31, 2007, goodwill was approximately $82.7 million, or 33.6%, of
our total assets. At December 31, 2007, we tested our goodwill for
impairment utilizing a market capitalization approach and determined that we did
not have an impairment.
Stock-based
compensation. We currently account for stock-based
employee compensation arrangements in accordance with the provisions of SFAS No.
123R, “Share Based
Payment.” Effective January 1, 2004, we elected to change our
accounting policies from the use of the intrinsic value method of Accounting
Principles Board ("APB") Opinion No. 25, "Accounting for Stock-Based
Compensation" to the fair value-based method of accounting for options as
prescribed by SFAS No. 123 “Accounting for Stock-Based
Compensation”. As permitted under SFAS No. 148, "Accounting for Stock-Based
Compensation—Transitions and Disclosure—an amendment to SFAS Statement
No. 123," we elected to retroactively restate all periods presented.
Because no market for our common stock existed prior to our initial public
offering, our board of directors determined the fair value of our common stock
based upon several factors, including our operating performance, forecasted
future operating results, and our expected valuation in an initial public
offering.
Prior to
our initial public offering, we valued the exercise price of options issued to
employees using a market based approach. This approach took into consideration
the value ascribed to our competitors by the market. In determining the fair
value of an option at the time of grant, we reviewed contemporaneous information
about our peers, which included a variety of market multiples, including, but
not limited to, revenue, EBITDA, net income, historical growth rates and
market/industry focus. During 2004, the value we ascribed to stock options
granted was based upon our anticipated initial public offering as well as
discussions with our investment advisors. Due to the number of peer companies in
our sector, we believed using public company comparisons provided a better
indication of how the market values companies in the for-profit post secondary
education sector.
During
2005, we adopted the provisions of SFAS No. 123R, “Share Based Payment”. The
adoption of SFAS No. 123R did not have a material impact on our financial
statements.
The fair
value of the stock options used to compute stock-based compensation is the
estimated present value at the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option
pricing model. The weighted average fair values of options granted during 2007,
2006, and 2005 were $6.78, $9.68, and $10.55, respectively, using the following
weighted average assumptions for grants:
|
|
December
31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
Expected
volatility
|
|
|
55.42 |
% |
|
|
55.10 |
% |
|
|
55.10-71.35 |
% |
Expected
dividend yield
|
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
0 |
% |
Expected
life (term)
|
|
6
Years
|
|
|
6
Years
|
|
|
4-8
Years
|
|
Risk-free
interest rate
|
|
|
4.36 |
% |
|
|
4.13-4.84 |
% |
|
|
3.59-4.29 |
% |
Weighted-average
exercise price during the year
|
|
$ |
11.96 |
|
|
$ |
17.00 |
|
|
$ |
17.14 |
|
Results
of Continuing Operations for the Three Years Ended December 31,
2007
The
following table sets forth selected consolidated statements of continuing
operations data as a percentage of revenues for each of the periods
indicated:
|
|
Year
Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
Costs
and expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Educational
services and facilities
|
|
|
42.6 |
% |
|
|
41.6 |
% |
|
|
39.7 |
% |
Selling,
general and administrative
|
|
|
49.5 |
% |
|
|
48.7 |
% |
|
|
48.1 |
% |
(Gain)
loss on sale of assets
|
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
|
(0.1 |
)% |
|
|
0.0 |
% |
Total
costs and expenses
|
|
|
92.1 |
% |
|
|
90.1 |
% |
|
|
87.8 |
% |
Operating
income
|
|
|
7.9 |
% |
|
|
9.9 |
% |
|
|
12.2 |
% |
Interest
expense, net
|
|
|
(0.7 |
)% |
|
|
(0.5 |
)% |
|
|
(0.7 |
)% |
Other
income
|
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
|
0.1 |
% |
Income
from continuing operations before income taxes
|
|
|
7.2 |
% |
|
|
9.4 |
% |
|
|
11.6 |
% |
Provision
for income taxes
|
|
|
3.0 |
% |
|
|
3.9 |
% |
|
|
4.5 |
% |
Income
from continuing operations
|
|
|
4.2 |
% |
|
|
5.5 |
% |
|
|
7.1 |
% |
Year
Ended December 31, 2007 Compared to Year Ended December 31,
2006
Revenues. Revenues
increased by $17.1 million, or 5.5%, to $327.8 million for 2007 from
$310.6 million for 2006. Approximately $7.4 million of this increase
was a result of our acquisition of New England Institute of Technology at Palm
Beach, Inc. (FLA), on May 22, 2006. The remainder of the increase was due to
tuition increases, which ranged between 2% and 5% annually depending on the
program. For the year ended December 31, 2007, our average
undergraduate full-time student enrollment increased 1.7% to 17,687 compared to
17,397 for the year ended December 31, 2006. Excluding our acquisition of FLA,
our average undergraduate student enrollment decreased by 0.4% to 16,682 from
16,757 in 2006.
Historically,
our schools have lower student populations in our first and second quarters and
we have experienced large class starts in the third and fourth quarters. Our
second half growth is largely dependent on a successful high school recruiting
season. We recruit our high school students several months ahead of their
scheduled start dates, and thus, while we have visibility on the number of
students who have expressed interest in attending our schools, we cannot predict
with certainty the actual number of new student starts and its related impact on
revenue.
During
2006, we experienced erosion between the number of students who expressed an
interest in attending our schools and enrolled, and those that commenced
classes. Many of these prospective students chose immediate employment, rather
than pursuing education in the near term. Moreover, we believe the attractive
job market further elevated sensitivity levels regarding the affordability of
education. As a result of the above, our first half 2007 revenue was
negatively impacted by lower student populations at our
campuses. This was not offset until the third quarter of 2007 when we
experienced a 10.3% increase in student starts due to improved retention of
sales representatives, packaging our students for financial aid earlier in the
process and by extending our student outreach program.
Educational
services and facilities expenses. Our educational
services and facilities expenses increased by $10.2 million, or 7.9%, to
$139.5 million for 2007 from $129.3 million for 2006. Our acquisition
of FLA accounted for $3.0 million or 29.4% of this increase. Excluding FLA,
instructional expenses and books and tools expense increased by $1.1 million or
1.7% and $1.8 million or 11.9%, respectively, over the prior year primarily due
to increased compensation and benefits expenses and due to higher volumes of
sales for books and tools. The remainder of the increase in educational services
and facilities expenses was primarily due to facilities expenses which increased
$4.3 million over the prior year. Of this amount approximately $3.7 million
represents increases in facility costs and $0.6 million represents additional
depreciation expense during the year over prior year. The increase in
facilities costs is primarily due to a $1.0 million increase in rent expense in
2007 due to our expanded campus facilities at our Rhode Island,
Southwestern and Indianapolis campuses. We also experienced increased costs for
insurance and real estate taxes, which increased approximately $0.5 million from
the prior year, utilities which increased approximately $0.5 million over the
prior year and from repairs and maintenance expenses, which increased
approximately $1.4 million over the prior year. Approximately $0.8
million of the increase in repairs and maintenance was due to higher than normal
repairs and maintenance expenses at one of our schools. Educational
services and facilities expenses as a percentage of revenues increased to 42.6%
of revenues for 2007 from 41.6% for 2006.
Selling, general
and administrative expenses. Our selling, general
and administrative expenses for the year ended December 31, 2007 were $162.4
million, an increase of $11.3 million, or 7.5%, from $151.1 million for
2006. Approximately $4.1 million of this increase were attributed to our
acquisition of FLA. The remainder of the increase was primarily due to:
(a) a $1.0 million or 3.3% increase in sales expense resulting mainly from
yearly compensation increases; (b) a $0.6 million or 2.1%, increase in
marketing costs as a result of increased advertising expenses associated with
student leads and enrollment; and (c) a $5.2 million or 7.0% increase in
administrative expenses, over the prior year.
The
increase in marketing expenses during 2007 included a shift from television
advertising to internet based initiatives and from the re-launching of our
website during 2007. These initiatives increased student leads at a
lower cost per lead. Included in administrative expenses during 2007
are an upfront one time non-cash charge of $0.5 million incurred in connection
with the termination of certain lease agreements and a $0.6 million charge
incurred in connection with severance payments related to the separation of
employment of two executives. The remainder of the increase in
administrative expenses was attributable to a higher provision for bad debts in
2007 as compared to 2006. Bad debt expense, excluding FLA in 2007 increased by
$1.8 million from $14.9 million in 2006 to $16.7 million for the year ended
December 31, 2007. This increase was due to higher accounts receivable balances
throughout the year as compared to prior year, resulting from increased loans to
our students. The remainder of the increase in administrative
expenses is due to yearly compensation increases to existing personnel and
higher benefit costs during the year.
As a
percentage of revenue, selling, general and administrative expenses increased to
49.5% of revenues for 2007 from 48.7% for 2006.
Interest
income. Interest income decreased to $0.2 million
for the year ended December 31, 2007, a decrease of $0.8 million from interest
income of $1.0 million for 2006. The decrease in interest income for the year
was due to lower average cash balances during the year as compared to
2006.
Interest expense.
Interest expense was essentially flat year over year at $2.3 million,
respectively in 2007 and 2006 due to our average borrowings during 2007
remaining relatively flat with 2006.
Income
taxes. Our provision for income taxes for the year
ended December 31, 2007 was $9.9 million, or 41.8% of pretax income,
compared to $12.1 million, or 41.4% of pretax income for the year ended December
31, 2006. The increase in effective tax rate for the year ended December 31,
2007 is attributable to higher state income taxes during the
period.
Year
Ended December 31, 2006 Compared to Year Ended December 31,
2005
Revenues. Revenues
increased by $23.3 million, or 8.1%, to $310.6 million for 2006 from
$287.4 million for 2005. Approximately $5.4 million and $10.4 million,
respectively, of this increase was a result of our acquisition of Euphoria on
December 1, 2005 and our acquisition of New England Institute of Technology at
Palm Beach, Inc. (“FLA”), on May 22, 2006. The remainder of the increase was due
to tuition increases, which ranged between 2% and 5% annually depending on the
program. Substantially all of our revenues consist of student tuition. For the
year ended December 31, 2006, our average undergraduate full-time student
enrollment increased 2.0% to 17,397 compared to 17,064 for the year ended
December 31, 2005. Excluding our acquisition of Euphoria and FLA, our average
undergraduate student enrollment decreased by 3.3% to 16,492.
Historically,
our schools have lower student populations in our first and second quarters and
we have experienced large class starts in the third and fourth quarters. Our
second half growth is largely dependent on a successful high school recruiting
season. We recruit our high school students several months ahead of their
scheduled start dates, and thus, while we have visibility on the number of
students who have expressed interest in attending our schools, we cannot predict
with certainty the actual number of new student starts and its related impact on
revenue.
As the
third quarter of 2006 progressed, we experienced erosion between the number of
students who expressed an interest in attending our schools and enrolled, and
those that commenced classes. Many of these prospective students chose immediate
employment, rather than pursuing education in the near term. Moreover, we
believe the attractive job market further elevated sensitivity levels regarding
the affordability of education, given the attractive alternative of immediate
employment.
Educational
services and facilities expenses. Our educational
services and facilities expenses increased by $15.2 million, or 13.3%, to
$129.3 million for 2006 from $114.2 million for 2005. Our acquisitions
of Euphoria and FLA accounted for $8.0 million or 52.6% of this increase.
Excluding Euphoria and FLA, instructional expenses and books and tools expense
increased by $3.5 million or 5.7% and $1.2 million or 9.4%, respectively, over
the prior year primarily due to increased compensation and benefits expenses and
due to higher costs of books and tools. The remainder of the increase in
educational services and facilities expenses was primarily due to facilities
expenses which increased $2.5 million over the prior year. Of this amount
approximately $0.8 million represented additional rent expense in 2006 due to
our expanded campus facilities in Lincoln, Rhode Island and NETI as well as from
normal rent escalation clauses. During the year we also experienced increased
costs for insurance and real estate taxes, which increased approximately $0.4
million from the prior year, utilities which increased approximately $0.5
million over the prior year and from repairs and maintenance expenses, which
increased approximately $0.4 million over the prior year. Educational services
and facilities expenses as a percentage of revenues increased to 41.6% of
revenues for 2006 from 39.7% for 2005.
Selling, general
and administrative expenses. Our selling, general
and administrative expenses for the year ended December 31, 2006 were $151.1
million, an increase of $13.0 million, or 9.4%, from $138.1 million for
2005. Approximately $1.5 million and $4.0 million of this increase were
attributed to our acquisitions of Euphoria and FLA, respectively. The remainder
of the increase was primarily due to: (a) a $1.4 million or 4.8% increase
in sales expense resulting mainly from incremental compensation and benefit
expenses related to additional sales representatives; (b) an 10.0%, or $2.6
million, increase in marketing costs as a result of increased advertising
expenses associated with student leads and enrollment; (c) a $3.5 million or
5.1% increase in administrative expenses, excluding Euphoria and FLA, over the
prior year. The increase in administrative expenses included approximately $0.9
million of re-branding costs incurred during the year. The remainder of the
increase in administrative expenses was attributable to a higher provision for
bad debts in 2006 as compared to 2005. Bad debt expense in 2006 increased by
$4.5 million from $10.6 million in 2005 to $15.1 million for the year ended
December 31, 2006. This increase was due to several factors, including (1)
higher accounts receivable balances throughout the year as compared to prior
year, (2) increased loans to our students under a recourse agreement we entered
into in 2005 with SLM Financial Corporation (SLM) to provide private recourse
loans to qualifying students, and (3) the effect of increasing the payment terms
on the self finance portion of their tuition to some of our students from 5
years to 7 years. Accounts receivable throughout the year included five new
campuses that did not exist in 2005 (our two Euphoria and two FLA campuses as
well as our new Queens, New York campus). Under the terms of the SLM agreement,
we are required to fund up to 30% of all loans disbursed into a deposit account,
which may ultimately be utilized to purchase loans in default. As of December
31, 2006, we had reserved $1.5 million under this agreement, which represents an
increase of $1.1 million from amounts reserved at December 31, 2005. Funding
under this agreement terminated by its terms on June 30, 2006.
These
increases were partially offset by lower expenses incurred in rolling out our
campus management and reporting system as well as lower compensation expense,
primarily resulting from a decrease in bonuses to be paid. As a percentage of
revenue, selling, general and administrative expenses increased to 48.7% of
revenues for 2006 from 48.1% for 2005.
Interest
income. Interest income increased to $1.0 million
for the year ended December 31, 2006, an increase of $0.2 million from interest
income of $0.8 million for 2005. The increase in interest income for the year
was due to higher average cash balances during the year, resulting from receipt
of $56.3 million of net proceeds from our initial public offering in June 2005
and cash generated by operations.
Interest expense.
Interest expense decreased $0.6 million, or 20.8%, to
$2.3 million for 2006 from $2.9 million for 2005. This decrease was
primarily due to a decrease in our average debt balance outstanding as we
utilized a portion of the proceeds from our initial public offering to pay down
all amounts outstanding under our previous credit agreement in 2005. Interest
expense for the year ended December 31, 2005 also included approximately $0.4
million related to the write-off of deferred financing costs under our previous
credit agreement.
Income
taxes. Our provision for income taxes for the year
ended December 31, 2006 was $12.1 million, or 41.4% of pretax income,
compared to $12.9 million, or 38.9% of pretax income for the year ended December
31, 2005. The increase in effective tax rate for the year ended December 31,
2006 is attributable to the recognition of a tax benefit of $0.8 million in 2005
related to the favorable resolution of a tax contingency.
LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL
RESOURCES
Our
primary capital requirements are for facilities expansion and maintenance,
acquisitions and the development of new programs. Our principal sources of
liquidity have been cash provided by operating activities and borrowings under
our credit agreement. The following chart summarizes the principal elements of
our cash flow for each of the three years in the period ended December 31,
2007:
|
|
Cash
Flow Summary
|
|
|
|
Year
Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
(In
thousands)
|
|
Net
cash provided by operating activities
|
|
$ |
15,735 |
|
|
$ |
15,258 |
|
|
$ |
38,966 |
|
Net
cash used in investing activities
|
|
$ |
(23,830 |
) |
|
$ |
(52,160 |
) |
|
$ |
(50,397 |
) |
Net
cash provided by (used in) financing activities
|
|
$ |
5,136 |
|
|
$ |
(6,894 |
) |
|
$ |
20,243 |
|
Operating
Activities
As of
December 31, 2007, we had cash and cash equivalents of $3.5 million,
compared to cash and cash equivalents of $6.5 million as of
December 31, 2006. Historically, we have financed our operating activities
and our organic growth primarily through cash generated from operations. We have
financed acquisitions primarily through the proceeds from our initial public
offering, borrowings under our credit agreement and cash generated from
operations. Management currently anticipates that we will be able to meet both
our short-term cash needs, as well as our needs to fund operations and meet our
obligations beyond the next twelve months with cash generated by operations,
existing cash balances and, if necessary, borrowings under our credit agreement.
As of December 31, 2007, we had net borrowings available under our $100 million
credit agreement of $90.6 million, including a sub-limit on letters of credit of
$15.6 million.
Our
primary source of cash is tuition collected from the students. The majority of
students enrolled at our schools rely on funds received under various
government-sponsored student financial aid programs to pay a substantial portion
of their tuition and other education-related expenses. The largest of these
programs are Title IV Programs which represented approximately 80% of our cash
receipts relating to revenues in 2007. Students must apply for a new loan for
each academic period. Federal regulations dictate the timing of disbursements of
funds under Title IV Programs and loan funds are generally provided by lenders
in two disbursements for each academic year. The first disbursement is usually
received approximately 30 days after the start of a student's academic year
and the second disbursement is typically received at the beginning of the
sixteenth week from the start of the student's academic year. Certain types of
grants and other funding are not subject to a 30-day delay. Our programs range
from 14 to 105 weeks. In certain instances, if a student withdraws from a
program prior to a specified date, any paid but unearned tuition or prorated
Title IV financial aid is refunded and the amount of the refund varies by
state.
As a
result of the significance of the Title IV funds received by our students, we
are highly dependent on these funds to operate our business. Any reduction in
the level of Title IV funds that our students are eligible to receive or any
impact on our ability to be able to receive Title IV funds would have a
significant impact on
our operations and our financial condition.
Year Ended
December 31, 2007 Compared to Year Ended December 31,
2006. Net cash provided by operating activities
increased to $15.7 million for 2007 from $15.3 million for 2006. This
increase of $0.4 million was primarily due to a reduction of approximately
$5.7 million in cash paid for income taxes during 2007 as compared to 2006
offset by a $3.7 million increase in accounts receivable at December 31,
2007 from December 31, 2006. The remainder of the decrease was
primarily due to decreases in cash used for working capital items during the
year offset by a decrease in net income during the year. The increase
in accounts receivable which represents 27.5 days revenues outstanding for 2007
as compared to 24.3 days revenue outstanding in 2006 is attributable to the
increase in loans that we provided to our students. As the gap
between the amount of funding provided by Title IV and tuition rates widens,
students are finding it increasingly difficult to finance on a short term basis
this portion of their tuition. This has resulted in an overall increase in the
term of loan programs established to assist students in financing this gap. In
an ongoing effort to help those students who are unable to obtain any additional
sources of financing, we assist students in financing a portion of their
tuition. Students that elect to participate in this financing option currently
have up to seven years to repay this obligation, an increase of up to two years
from the five year term that we previously offered our students in prior
years.
The increase in loans to our students adversely impacts our
accounts receivable, our allowance for doubtful accounts and our cash flow from
operations. Although we reserved for estimated losses related to unpaid student
balances, losses in excess of the amounts we have reserved for bad debts will
result in a reduction in our profitability and can have an adverse impact on the
results of our operations.
Year Ended
December 31, 2006 Compared to Year Ended December 31,
2005. Net cash provided by operating activities
decreased to $15.3 million for 2006 from $39.0 million for 2005. This
decrease of $23.7 million, or 60.8%, was primarily due to a
$10.2 million increase in accounts receivable at December 31, 2006 from
December 31, 2005. This increase in accounts receivable which represents 24.1
days revenues outstanding for 2006 as compared to 17.3 days revenue outstanding
in 2005 is attributable to the addition of five campuses during 2006 as well as
the increase in the self-pay portion of our students’ tuition.
Other
significant items impacting cash flow from operations in 2006 versus 2005 were
the impact of the $3.2 million reduction in our net income in 2006 and a $4.8
million increase in cash paid during 2006 for income taxes. The increase in cash
paid for income taxes during 2006 was due to the Company having overpaid amounts
due in 2005.
Investing
Activities
Our cash
used in investing activities was primarily related to the purchase of property
and equipment and in acquiring schools. Our capital expenditures primarily
result from facility expansion, leasehold improvements, and investments in
classroom and shop technology and in operating systems. On May 22, 2006 we
acquired all of the outstanding common stock of FLA for $32.9 million in cash
and the assumption of a mortgage. On January 11, 2005, we acquired NETI for
$18.8 million in cash and on December 1, 2005, we acquired Euphoria for
approximately $9.0 million in cash.
We
currently lease a majority of our campuses. We own our new Grand Prairie, Texas
campus, our FLA campuses, our Nashville campus and certain buildings in our
Southwestern campuses. As we execute our growth strategy, strategic acquisitions
of campuses may be considered. In addition, although our current growth strategy
is to continue our organic growth, strategic acquisitions of operations will be
considered. To the extent that these potential strategic acquisitions are large
enough to require financing beyond available cash from operations and borrowings
under our credit facilities, we may incur additional debt or issue additional
debt or equity securities.
Year Ended
December 31,
2007
Compared to the Year Ended December 31,
2006. Net
cash used in investing activities decreased $28.4 million to
$23.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2007 from
$52.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2006. This decrease was
primarily attributable to a $32.9 million decrease in cash used in acquisitions
offset by a $5.4 million increase in capital expenditures for the year ended
December 31, 2007 from the year ended December 31, 2006.
Year
Ended December 31,
2006
Compared to the Year Ended December 31,
2005. Net cash used
in investing activities increased $1.8 million to $52.2 million for the year ended
December 31, 2006 from $50.4 million for the year ended
December 31, 2005. This increase was primarily attributable to a $5.1
million increase in cash used in acquisitions offset by a $3.3 million decrease
in capital expenditures for the year ended December 31, 2006 from the year ended December 31, 2005.
Capital
expenditures are expected to increase in 2008 as we upgrade and expand current
equipment and facilities or open or expand new facilities to meet increased
student enrollments. We anticipate capital expenditures to range between 8% to
10% of revenues in 2008 and expect to fund these capital expenditures with cash
generated from operating activities and, if necessary, with borrowings under our
credit agreement.
Financing
Activities
Year
Ended December 31,
2007
Compared to the Year Ended December 31,
2006.
Net cash provided by financing activities was $5.1 million for the year ended
December 31,
2007, as compared to net cash used in financing activities of $6.9 million for the year ended
December 31,
2006. This increase is due to increased borrowings under our
credit facility during 2007 to fund our working capital needs.
Year Ended
December 31, 2006 Compared to the Year Ended December 31, 2005.
Net cash used in financing activities was $6.9 million for the year
ended December 31, 2006, as compared to net cash provided by financing
activities of $20.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2005. This
decrease is attributable to our repaying the mortgage note assumed in our
purchase of FLA in 2006, reduced by our receipt of the net proceeds from our
initial public offering in 2005 reduced by debt repayments under our previous
credit agreement.
On
February 15, 2005, we and our subsidiaries entered into a credit agreement
with a syndicate of banks, which expires February 15, 2010. This
credit agreement provides for a $100 million revolving credit facility with
a term of five years under which any outstanding borrowings bear interest at the
rate of adjusted LIBOR (as defined in the new credit agreement) plus a margin
that may range from 1.00% to 1.75% or a base rate (as defined in the new credit
agreement) plus a margin that may range from 0.00% to 0.25%. At December 31,
2007 we had $5.0 million outstanding under the credit agreement. This
amount was repaid in the January 2008. The credit agreement permits the issuance
of letters of credit up to an aggregate amount of $20.0 million, the amount
of which reduces the availability of permitted borrowings under the new credit
agreement. We incurred approximately $0.8 million of deferred finance costs
under this agreement.
Our
obligations and our subsidiaries’ obligations under the credit agreement are
secured by a lien on substantially all of our and our subsidiaries’ assets and
any assets that we and our subsidiaries may acquire in the future, including a
pledge of substantially all of the subsidiaries’ common stock. In addition to
paying interest on outstanding principal under the credit agreement, we are
required to pay a commitment fee to the lender with respect to the unused
amounts available under the credit agreement at a rate equal to 0.25% to 0.40%
per year, as defined.
The
credit agreement contains various covenants, including a number of financial
covenants. Furthermore, the credit agreement contains customary events of
default as well as an event of default in the event of the suspension or
termination of Title IV Program funding for our and our subsidiaries' schools
aggregating 10% or more of our EBITDA (as defined in the new credit agreement)
or our and our subsidiaries' consolidated total assets and such suspension or
termination is not cured within a specified period. The following table sets
forth our long-term debt for the periods indicated:
|
|
As
of December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
Credit
agreement
|
|
$ |
5,000 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
Finance
obligation
|
|
|
9,672 |
|
|
|
9,672 |
|
Automobile
loans
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
37 |
|
Capital
leases-computers (with rates ranging from 2.9% to 8.7%)
|
|
|
690 |
|
|
|
151 |
|
Subtotal
|
|
|
15,378 |
|
|
|
9,860 |
|
Less
current maturities
|
|
|
(204 |
) |
|
|
(91 |
) |
Total long-term
debt
|
|
$ |
15,174 |
|
|
$ |
9,769 |
|
We
believe that our working capital, cash flow from operations, access to operating
leases and borrowings available from our amended credit agreement will provide
us with adequate resources for our ongoing operations through 2008 and our
currently identified and planned capital expenditures.
Contractual
Obligations
Long-Term
Debt
and Lease Commitments. As of
December 31, 2007, our long-term debt consisted of amounts borrowed under
our credit agreement, the finance obligation in connection with our
sale-leaseback transaction in 2001 and amounts due under capital lease
obligations. We lease offices, educational
facilities and various equipment for varying periods through the year 2023 at
basic annual rentals (excluding taxes, insurance, and other expenses under
certain leases).
The
following table contains supplemental information regarding our total
contractual obligations as of December 31, 2007:
|
|
Payments
Due by Period
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Less
than 1 year
|
|
|
2-3
years
|
|
|
4-5
years
|
|
|
After
5 years
|
|
Credit
agreement
|
|
$ |
5,000 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
5,000 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
Capital
leases (including interest)
|
|
|
838 |
|
|
|
255 |
|
|
|
328 |
|
|
|
255 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Operating
leases
|
|
|
133,433 |
|
|
|
16,398 |
|
|
|
28,380 |
|
|
|
24,385 |
|
|
|
64,270 |
|
Rent
on finance obligation
|
|
|
12,546 |
|
|
|
1,381 |
|
|
|
2,762 |
|
|
|
2,762 |
|
|
|
5,641 |
|
Automobile
loans (including interest)
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Total
contractual cash obligations
|
|
$ |
151,833 |
|
|
$ |
18,050 |
|
|
$ |
36,470 |
|
|
$ |
27,402 |
|
|
$ |
69,911 |
|
Capital
Expenditures. We have entered into commitments to
expand or renovate campuses. These commitments are in the range of $3.0 to $5.0
million in the aggregate and are due within the next 12 months. We expect to
fund these commitments from cash generated from operations.
OFF-BALANCE SHEET
ARRANGEMENTS
We had no
off-balance sheet arrangements as of December 31, 2007, except for our
letters of credit of $4.4 million which are primarily comprised of letters of
credit for the DOE and security deposits in connection with certain of our real
estate leases. These off-balance sheet arrangements do not adversely impact our
liquidity or capital resources.
RELATED PARTY
TRANSACTIONS
On
October 15, 2007, we entered into a Separation and Release Agreement with
Lawrence E. Brown, our former Vice Chairman. Under this agreement Mr.
Brown’s employment terminated as of the close of business on October 31,
2007. For a period of 14 months following the date of separation of
employment, Mr. Brown may continue to provide transitional services to us, not
to exceed ten hours per month. In consideration for a release of
claims, we paid Mr. Brown a lump sum cash payment of $0.5 million, subject to
withholding, and will reimburse Mr. Brown for the employer-portion of the
premiums due for continuation of coverage under COBRA for a maximum period
ending on December 31, 2008. Mr. Brown is entitled to the use of his
automobile and reimbursement of associated costs by us through December 31,
2008. In addition, pursuant to the terms of the agreement, Mr. Brown
agreed to be subject to certain restrictive covenants, which, among other
things, prohibit him for the duration of 14 months following the date of
separation of employment, without our prior written consent, from (i) competing
against us and (ii) soliciting our or any of our affiliates’ or subsidiaries’
employees, consultants, clients or customers.
Pursuant
to the Employment Agreement between Shaun E. McAlmont and us, we agreed to pay
and reimburse Mr. McAlmont for the reasonable costs of his relocation from
Denver, Colorado to West Orange, New Jersey in the year ended December 31, 2006.
Such relocation assistance included our purchase of Mr. McAlmont’s home in
Denver, Colorado. The $0.5 million price paid for Mr. McAlmont’s home equaled
the average of the amount of two independent appraisers selected by us. This
amount is reflected in property, equipment and facilities in the accompanying
consolidated balance sheets.
We had a
consulting agreement with Hart Capital LLC, which terminated by its terms in
June 2004, to advise us in identifying acquisition and merger targets and
assisting with the due diligence reviews of and negotiations with these
targets. Hart Capital is the managing member of Five Mile River Capital
Partners LLC, which is the second largest stockholder of the Company.
Steven Hart, the President of Hart Capital, is a member of our board of
directors. We paid Hart Capital a monthly retainer, reimbursement of expenses
and an advisory fee for its work on successful acquisitions or mergers. In
accordance with the agreement, we paid Hart Capital approximately $0, and $0.4
million for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively. In
connection with the consummation of the NETI acquisition, which closed on
January 11, 2005, we paid Hart Capital $0.3 million for its
services.
In 2003, we entered into a management
service agreement with our major stockholder. In accordance with this
agreement we paid Stonington Partners a management fee of $0.75 million per year
for management consulting and financial and business advisory services for each
of the years in 2005, 2004 and 2003. Such services included valuing
acquisitions and structuring their financing and assisting with new loan
agreements. We paid Stonington Partners $0 and $0.75 million for the years
ended December 31,
2006 and 2005,
respectively. Fees paid to Stonington Partners were being amortized over a
twelve month period. This agreement terminated by its terms upon our
completion of its initial public offering. Selling, general and
administrative expenses for the year ended December 31, 2005 includes $0.4 million resulting from
the amortization of these fees.
SEASONALITY AND
TRENDS
Our net
revenues and operating results normally fluctuate as a result of seasonal
variations in our business, principally due to changes in total student
population. Student population varies as a result of new student enrollments,
graduations and student attrition. Historically, our schools have had lower
student populations in our first and second quarters and we have experienced
large class starts in the third and fourth quarters and student attrition in the
first half of the year. Our second half growth is largely dependent on a
successful high school recruiting season. We recruit our high school students
several months ahead of their scheduled start dates, and thus, while we have
visibility on the number of students who have expressed interest in attending
our schools, we cannot predict with certainty the actual number of new student
enrollments and the related impact on revenue. Our expenses, however, do not
vary significantly over the course of the year with changes in our student
population and net revenues. During the first half of the year, we make
significant investments in marketing, staff, programs and facilities to ensure
that we meet our second half of the year targets and, as a result, such expenses
do not fluctuate significantly on a quarterly basis. To the extent new student
enrollments, and related revenues, in the second half of the year fall short of
our estimates, our operating results could suffer. We expect quarterly
fluctuations in operating results to continue as a result of seasonal enrollment
patterns. Such patterns may change as a result of new school openings, new
program introductions, increased enrollments of adult students and/or
acquisitions.
Similar
to many other for-profit post secondary education companies, the increase in our
average undergraduate enrollments did not meet our anticipated growth rates. As
a result of the slow down in 2005, we entered 2006 with fewer students enrolled
than we had in January of 2005. This trend continued throughout 2006 and
resulted in a shortfall in the enrollments we were expecting in the second half
of 2006 and especially in the third quarter which has accounted for a majority
of our yearly starts. As a result we will also enter 2007 with fewer students
enrolled than we had in January 2006. This trend continuing
during the first half of 2007 and reserved itself in the latter half of the year
as we benefited from the 2007 high school recruiting season. The
slow-down that has occurred in the for-profit post secondary education sector
appears to have had a greater impact on companies, like ours, that are more
dependent on their on-ground business as opposed to on-line students. We believe
that the slow-down can be attributed to many factors, including: (a) the
economy; (b) the availability of student financing; (c) dependency on television
to attract students to our school; (d) turnover of our sales representatives;
and (e) increasing competition in the marketplace.
Despite
soft organic enrollment trends and increased volatility in the near term, we
believe that our growth initiatives as well as the steps we have taken to
address the challenging trends that our industry and we are currently facing
will produce positive growth over the long-term. While our operating strategy,
business model and infrastructure are well suited for the short-term and we have
ample operating flexibility, we continue to be prudent and realistic and have
taken the necessary steps to ensure that operations that have not grown as
rapidly as expected are right sized. We also continue to make investments in
areas that are demonstrating solid growth.
RECENT ACCOUNTING
PRONOUNCEMENTS
In
December 2007, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued
Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 141 (revised
2007), "Business Combinations"
(“SFAS No. 141R”). The Statement establishes revised principles and
requirements for how we will recognize and measure assets and liabilities
acquired in a business combination. The Statement is effective for business
combinations completed on or after the beginning of the first annual reporting
period beginning on or after December 15, 2008. The adoption of the
provision of SFAS No. 141R is not expected to have a material effect on our
consolidated financial statements.
In
December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 160, "Noncontrolling Interests in
Consolidated Financial Statements, an amendment of Accounting Research Bulletin
(“ARB”) No. 51". The Statement establishes accounting and reporting
standards for the noncontrolling interest in a subsidiary and for the
deconsolidation of a subsidiary. The Statement is effective on or after the
beginning of the first annual reporting period beginning on or after
December 15, 2008, which begins January 1, 2009 for us. The adoption
of the provision of SFAS No. 160 is not expected to have a material effect on
our consolidated financial statements.
In
February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 159, “The Fair Value Option for Financial
Assets and Financial Liabilities”, providing companies with an option to
report selected financial assets and liabilities at fair value. The
objective of SFAS No. 159 is to reduce both complexity in accounting for
financial instruments and the volatility in earnings caused by measuring related
assets and liabilities differently. Generally accepted accounting
principles have required different measurement attributes for different assets
and liabilities that can create artificial volatility in earnings. SFAS No. 159
helps to mitigate this type of accounting-induced volatility by enabling
companies to report related assets and liabilities at fair value, which would
likely reduce the need for companies to comply with detailed rules for hedge
accounting. SFAS No. 159 also establishes presentation and disclosure
requirements designed to facilitate comparisons between companies that choose
different measurement attributes for similar types of assets and
liabilities. SFAS No. 159 requires companies to provide additional
information that will help investors and other users of financial statements to
more easily understand the effect of our choice to use fair value on its
earnings. It also requires entities to display the fair value of those assets
and liabilities for which we has chosen to use fair value on the face of the
balance sheet. SFAS No. 159 will be effective for us as of January 1,
2008. The adoption of the provision of SFAS No. 159 did not to have a
material effect on our consolidated financial statements.
In
September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 158, “Employers’ Accounting for Defined
Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans, an amendment of FASB Statements
No. 87, 88, 106, and 132(R).” Among other items, SFAS No. 158 requires
recognition of the overfunded or underfunded status of an entity’s defined
benefit postretirement plan as an asset or liability in the financial
statements, requires the measurement of defined benefit postretirement plan
assets and obligations as of the end of the employer’s fiscal year, and requires
recognition of the funded status of defined benefit postretirement plans in
other comprehensive income. We adopted SFAS No. 158 on December 31,
2006. The incremental effects of applying SFAS No. 158 on our
December 31, 2006 consolidated financial statements, on a line by line basis,
are as follows:
|
|
Balances
Before
Adoption
of
Statement
158
|
|
|
Adjustments
|
|
|
Balances
After
Adoption
of
Statement
158
|
|
Pension
plan assets, net
|
|
$ |
5,169 |
|
|
$ |
(4,062 |
) |
|
$ |
1,107 |
|
Deferred
income taxes
|
|
|
1,037 |
|
|
|
1,651 |
|
|
|
2,688 |
|
Accumulated
other comprehensive income
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
2,411 |
|
|
|
2,411 |
|
In
September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements.”
SFAS No. 157 defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair
value in GAAP, and expands disclosures about fair value measurements. This
Statement applies under other accounting pronouncements that require or permit
fair value measurements, the Board having previously concluded in those
accounting pronouncements that fair value is the relevant measurement attribute.
Accordingly, this Statement does not require any new fair value measurements.
The provisions of SFAS No. 157 are effective for the Company as of January 1,
2008. The adoption of the provision of SFAS No. 157 did not have a material
effect on our consolidated financial statements.
In
September 2006, the Securities and Exchange Commission issued Staff Accounting
Bulletin (“SAB”) No. 108 which provides interpretive guidance on how the effects
of the carryover or reversal of prior year unrecorded misstatements should be
considered in quantifying a current year misstatement. SAB No. 108 became
effective for the Company as of January 1, 2007. The adoption of the provision
of SAB No. 108 had no effect on our consolidated financial
statements.
In June
2006, FASB issued FASB Interpretation (“FIN”) No. 48, “Accounting for Uncertainty in Income
Taxes.” FIN No. 48 clarifies the accounting for uncertainty in income
taxes recognized in an enterprise’s financial statements in accordance with FASB
SFAS No. 109, “Accounting for
Income Taxes”, which was adopted by us on January 1, 2007. FIN
No. 48 prescribes a recognition threshold and a measurement attribute for the
financial statement recognition and measurement of tax positions taken or
expected to be taken in a tax return. For those benefits to be recognized, a tax
position must be more-likely-than-not to be sustained upon examination by taxing
authorities. The amount recognized is measured as the largest amount of benefit
that is greater than 50 percent likely of being realized upon ultimate
settlement. The adoption of FIN No. 48 resulted in a negative cumulative effect
adjustment to retained earnings as of January 1, 2007 of approximately $0.1
million.
In March
2006, FASB issued SFAS No. 156, “Accounting for Servicing of
Financial Assets.” SFAS No. 156 provides guidance addressing the
recognition and measurement of separately recognized servicing assets and
liabilities, common with mortgage securitization activities, and provides an
approach to simplify efforts to obtain hedge accounting treatment. SFAS No. 156
will be adopted on January 1, 2007. The adoption of the provision of SFAS No.
156 had no effect on our consolidated financial statements.
In
February 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 155, “Accounting for Certain Hybrid
Financial Instruments.” SFAS No. 155 is effective beginning January 1,
2007. The adoption of the provision of SFAS No. 155 had no effect on our
consolidated financial statements.
In June
2005, the FASB issued SFAS No. 154, “Accounting Changes and Error
Corrections, a replacement of APB Opinion No. 20 and FASB Statement No.
3.” SFAS No. 154 applies to all voluntary changes in accounting
principle, and changes the requirements for accounting for and reporting of a
change in accounting principle. SFAS No. 154 requires retrospective
application to prior periods’ financial statements of a voluntary change in
accounting principle unless it is impracticable. Accounting Principles Boards
(“APB”) Opinion No. 20 previously required that most voluntary changes in
accounting principle be recognized by including in net income of the period of
the change the cumulative effect of changing to the new accounting principle.
SFAS No. 154 requires that a change in method of depreciation, amortization, or
depletion for long-lived, nonfinancial assets be accounted for as a change in
accounting estimate that is affected by a change in accounting principle. APB
Opinion No. 20 previously required that such a change be reported as a change in
accounting principle. We adopted SFAS No. 154 on January 1, 2006. The adoption
of the provisions of SFAS No. 154 had no effect on our consolidated financial
statements.
In March
2005, the FASB issued FIN 47, “Accounting for Conditional Asset
Retirement Obligations”. FIN 47 clarifies that a conditional asset
retirement obligation, as used in SFAS 143, “Accounting for Asset Retirement
Obligations,” refers to a legal obligation to perform an asset retirement
activity in which the timing and/or method of the settlement are conditional on
a future event that may or may not be within the control of the entity.
Accordingly, we are required to recognize a liability for the fair value of a
conditional asset retirement obligation if the fair value can be reasonably
estimated. We adopted FIN 47 on January 1, 2006. The adoption of the provisions
of FIN 47 had no effect on our consolidated financial statements.
ITEM 7A.
|
QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET
RISK
|
We are
exposed to certain market risks as part of our on-going business
operations. We have a credit agreement with a syndicate of banks.
Our obligations under the credit agreement are secured by a lien on
substantially all of our assets and our subsidiaries and any assets that we or
our subsidiaries may acquire in the future, including a pledge of substantially
all of our subsidiaries’ common stock. Outstanding borrowings bear
interest at the rate of adjusted LIBOR plus 1.0% to 1.75%, as defined, or a base
rate (as defined in the credit agreement). As of December 31, 2007, we had
$5.0 million outstanding under the credit agreement.
Based on
our outstanding debt balance, a change of one percent in the interest rate would
not cause a $0.1 million change in our interest expense. Changes in
interest rates could have an impact however on our operations, which are greatly
dependent on students’ ability to obtain financing. Any increase in interest
rates could greatly impact our ability to attract students and have an adverse
impact on the results of our operations.
The
remainder of our interest rate risk is associated with miscellaneous capital
equipment leases, which are not material.
Effect
of Inflation
Inflation
has not had and is not expected to have a significant effect on our
operations.
ITEM 8.
|
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY
DATA
|
See
“Index to Consolidated Financial Statements” on page F-1 on this Form
10-K.
ITEM 9.
|
CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND
FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE
|
None.
ITEM 9A.
|
DISCLOSURE CONTROLS AND
PROCEDURES
|
Evaluation of disclosure controls and
procedures
Our Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, after evaluating, together with
management, the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures (as
defined in Securities Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(e)) as of December 31, 2007,
have concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures are effective to
reasonably ensure that material information required to be disclosed by us in
the reports that we file or submit under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time
periods specified by Securities and Exchange Commissions’ Rules and Forms and
that such information is accumulated and communicated to our management,
including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, as
appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required
disclosure.
Internal Control Over Financial
Reporting
During
the quarter ended December 31, 2007, there has been no change in our internal
control over financial reporting that has materially affected, or is reasonably
likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial
reporting.
Management’s
Annual Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting
The
management of Lincoln Educational Services Corporation (the “Company”) is
responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over
financial reporting as defined in Rule 13a-15(f) under the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934. The Company’s internal control system was designed to provide
reasonable assurance to the Company’s management and Board of Directors
regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of
financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles.
Management
assessed the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial
reporting as of December 31, 2007, based on the framework set forth by the
Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) in Internal Control—Integrated
Framework. Based on its assessment, management believes that, as of
December 31, 2007, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting is
effective.
Because
of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not
prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of
effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become
inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance
with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
The
Company’s independent auditors, Deloitte & Touche LLP, an independent
registered public accounting firm, audited the Company’s internal control over
financial reporting as of December 31, 2007, as stated in their report included
in this Form 10-K that follows.
/s/ David F. Carney
|
|
David
F. Carney
|
|
Chairman
& Chief Executive Officer
|
|
March
17, 2008
|
|
|
|
/s/ Cesar Ribeiro
|
|
Cesar
Ribeiro
|
|
Chief
Financial Officer
|
|
March
17, 2008
|
|
PART
III.
ITEM 10.
|
DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE
GOVERNANCE
|
Directors
and Executive Officers
The
information required by this item is incorporated herein by reference to our
definitive Proxy Statement to be filed in connection with our 2008 Annual
Meeting of Shareholders.
Code
of Ethics
We have
adopted a Code of Conduct and Ethics applicable to our directors, officers
and employees and certain other persons, including our Chief Executive Officer
and Chief Financial Officer. A copy of our Code of Ethics is available on our
website at www.lincolnedu.com. If any
amendments to or waivers from the Code of Conduct are made, we will disclose
such amendments or waivers on our website.
Information
required by Item 11 of Part III is incorporated by reference to our
definitive Proxy Statement to be filed in connection with our 2008 Annual
Meeting of Shareholders.
ITEM 12.
|
SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT
AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER
MATTERS
|
Information
required by Item 12 of Part III is incorporated by reference to our
definitive Proxy Statement to be filed in connection with our 2008 Annual
Meeting of Shareholders.
ITEM 13.
|
CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS AND DIRECTOR
INDEPENDENCE
|
Information
required by Item 13 of Part III is incorporated by reference to our
definitive Proxy Statement to be filed in connection with our 2008 Annual
Meeting of Shareholders.
ITEM 14.
|
PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING FEES AND
SERVICES
|
Information
required by Item 14 of Part III is incorporated by reference to our
definitive Proxy Statement to be filed in connection with our 2008 Annual
Meeting of Shareholders.
PART
IV.
ITEM 15.
|
EXHIBITS AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT
SCHEDULE
|
See
“Index to Consolidated Financial Statements” on page F-1 of this Form
10-K.
2.
|
Financial Statement
Schedule
|
See
“Index to Consolidated Financial Statements” on page F-1 of this Form
10-K.
3.
|
Exhibits Required by Securities
and Exchange Commission
Regulation S-K
|
Exhibit
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
|
3.1
|
|
Amended
and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of the Company
(1).
|
|
|
|
3.2
|
|
Amended
and Restated By-laws of the Company (2).
|
|
|
|
4.1
|
|
Stockholders’
Agreement, dated as of September 15, 1999, among Lincoln Technical
Institute, Inc., Back to School Acquisition, L.L.C. and Five Mile River
Capital Partners LLC (1).
|
|
|
|
4.2
|
|
Letter
agreement, dated August 9, 2000, by Back to School Acquisition, L.L.C.,
amending the Stockholders’ Agreement (1).
|
|
|
|
4.3
|
|
Letter
agreement, dated August 9, 2000, by Lincoln Technical Institute, Inc.,
amending the Stockholders’ Agreement (1).
|
|
|
|
4.4
|
|
Management
Stockholders Agreement, dated as of January 1, 2002, by and among Lincoln
Technical Institute, Inc., Back to School Acquisition, L.L.C. and the
Stockholders and other holders of options under the Management Stock
Option Plan listed therein (1).
|
|
|
|
4.5
|
|
Assumption
Agreement and First Amendment to Management Stockholders Agreement, dated
as of December 20, 2007, by and among Lincoln Educational Services
Corporation, Lincoln Technical Institute, Inc., Back to School
Acquisition, L.L.C. and the Management Investors parties therein
(6).
|
|
|
|
4.6
|
|
Registration
Rights Agreement between the Company and Back to School Acquisition,
L.L.C. (2).
|
|
|
|
4.7
|
|
Specimen
Stock Certificate evidencing shares of common stock
(1).
|
|
|
|
10.1
|
|
Credit
Agreement, dated as of February 15, 2005, among the Company, the
Guarantors from time to time parties thereto, the Lenders from time to
time parties thereto and Harris Trust and Savings Bank, as Administrative
Agent (1).
|
|
|
|
10.2
|
|
Amended
and Restated Employment Agreement, dated as of February 1, 2007, between
the Company and David F. Carney (3).
|
|
|
|
10.3
|
|
Separation
and Release Agreement, dated as of October 15, 2007, between
the Company and Lawrence E. Brown (4).
|
|
|
|
10.4
|
|
Amended
and Restated Employment Agreement, dated as of February 1, 2007, between
the Company and Scott M. Shaw (3).
|
|
|
|
10.5
|
|
Amended
and Restated Employment Agreement, dated as of February 1, 2007, between
the Company and Cesar Ribeiro
(3).
|
10.6
|
|
Amended
and Restated Employment Agreement, dated as of February 1, 2007, between
the Company and Shaun E. McAlmont (3).
|
|
|
|
10.7
|
|
Lincoln
Educational Services Corporation 2005 Long Term Incentive Plan
(1).
|
|
|
|
10.8
|
|
Lincoln
Educational Services Corporation 2005 Non Employee Directors Restricted
Stock Plan (1).
|
|
|
|
10.9
|
|
Lincoln
Educational Services Corporation 2005 Deferred Compensation Plan
(1).
|
|
|
|
10.10
|
|
Lincoln
Technical Institute Management Stock Option Plan, effective January 1,
2002 (1).
|
|
|
|
10.11
|
|
Form
of Stock Option Agreement, dated January 1, 2002, between Lincoln
Technical Institute, Inc. and certain participants (1).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Form
of Stock Option Agreement under our 2005 Long Term Incentive
Plan.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Form
of Restricted Stock Agreement under our 2005 Long Term Incentive
Plan.
|
|
|
|
10.14
|
|
Management
Stock Subscription Agreement, dated January 1, 2002, among Lincoln
Technical Institute, Inc. and certain management investors
(1).
|
|
|
|
10.15
|
|
Stockholder’s
Agreement among Lincoln Educational Services Corporation, Back to School
Acquisition L.L.C., Steven W. Hart and Steven W. Hart 2003 Grantor
Retained Annuity Trust (2).
|
|
|
|
10.16
|
|
Stock
Purchase Agreement, dated as of March 30, 2006, among Lincoln Technical
Institute, Inc., and Richard I. Gouse, Andrew T. Gouse, individually and
as Trustee of the Carolyn Beth Gouse Irrevocable Trust, Seth A. Kurn and
Steven L. Meltzer (5).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subsidiaries
of the Company.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consent
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Certification
of Chairman & Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Certification
of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Certification
of Chairman & Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
(1)
|
Incorporated by reference to the
Company’s Registration Statement on Form S-1 (Registration No.
333-123664).
|
(2)
|
Incorporated
by reference to the Company’s Form 8-K dated June 28,
2005.
|
(3)
|
Incorporated
by reference to the Company’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2006.
|
(4)
|
Incorporated by reference to the
Company’s Form 8-K dated October 15,
2007.
|
(5)
|
Incorporated by reference to the
Company’s Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31,
2006.
|
(6)
|
Incorporated by reference to the
Company’s Registration Statement on Form S-3 (Registration No.
333-148406).
|
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section
13 or 15(d) 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.
Date: March
17, 2008
|
LINCOLN
EDUCATIONAL SERVICES CORPORATION
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
By:
|
/s/ Cesar Ribeiro
|
|
|
|
Cesar
Ribeiro
|
|
|
|
Senior
Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
|
|
|
(Principal
Accounting and Financial Officer)
|
Pursuant
to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been
signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the
capacities and on the dates indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/
David F. Carney
|
|
Chief
Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board
|
|
March
17, 2008
|
David
F. Carney
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Cesar Ribeiro
|
|
Senior
Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
|
|
March
17, 2008
|
Cesar
Ribeiro
|
|
(Principal
Accounting and Financial Officer) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Peter S. Burgess
|
|
Director
|
|
March
17, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ James J. Burke, Jr..
|
|
Director
|
|
March
17, 2008
|
James
J. Burke, Jr
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/
Celia H. Currin
|
|
Director
|
|
March
17, 2008
|
Celia H. Currin
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Paul E. Glaske
|
|
Director
|
|
March
17, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Alexis P. Michas
|
|
Director
|
|
March
17, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ J. Barry Morrow
|
|
Director
|
|
March
17, 2008
|
J.
Barry Morrow
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Jerry G. Rubenstein
|
|
Director
|
|
March
17, 2008
|
Jerry
G. Rubenstein
|
|
|
|
|
INDEX
TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND MANAGEMENT’S REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER
FINANCIAL REPORTING
|
|
Page
Number
|
Reports
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
|
|
F-2
|
Consolidated
Balance Sheets at December 31, 2007 and 2006
|
|
F-4
|
Consolidated
Statements of Income for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and
2005
|
|
F-6
|
Consolidated
Statements of Changes in Stockholders' Equity for the years ended December
31, 2007, 2006 and 2005
|
|
F-7
|
Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and
2005
|
|
F-8
|
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements
|
|
F-10
|
|
|
|
Item
15
|
|
|
Schedule
II-Valuation and Qualifying Accounts
|
|
F-29
|
REPORT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the
Board of Directors and Stockholders of
Lincoln
Educational Services Corporation
West
Orange, New Jersey
We have
audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Lincoln Educational
Services Corporation and subsidiaries (the "Company") as of December 31, 2007
and 2006, and the related consolidated statements of income, stockholders'
equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December
31, 2007. Our audits also included the consolidated financial
statement schedule listed in the Index at Item 15. These financial
statements and financial statement schedule are the responsibility of the
Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on
the financial statements and financial statement schedule based on our
audits.
We
conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require
that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether
the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit
includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and
disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes
assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by
management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement
presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis
for our opinion.
In our
opinion, such consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all material
respects, the financial position of Lincoln Educational Services Corporation and
subsidiaries at as of December 31, 2007 and 2006, and the results of their
operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended
December 31, 2007, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted
in the United States of America. Also, in our opinion,
suchconsolidated financial statement schedule, when considered in relation to
the basic consolidated financial statements taken as a whole, presents fairly,
in all material respects, the information set forth therein.
As
discussed in Note 2 to the consolidated financial statements, the Company
adopted the provisions of FASB Interpretation No. 48, “Accounting for Uncertainty in
Income Taxes.”
We have
also audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board (United States), the Company's internal control over financial
reporting as of December 31, 2007, based on the criteria established in Internal
Control—Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations
of the Treadway Commission and our report dated March 13, 2008 expressed an
unqualified opinion on the Company's internal control over financial
reporting.
DELOITTE
& TOUCHE LLP
Parsippany,
New Jersey
March 13,
2008
REPORT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the
Board of Directors and Stockholders of
Lincoln
Educational Services Corporation
West
Orange, New Jersey
We have
audited the internal control over financial reporting of Lincoln Educational
Services Corporation and subsidiaries (the "Company") as of December 31, 2007,
based on criteria established in Internal Control — Integrated Framework issued
by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission. The Company's management is responsible for maintaining
effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of
the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in the
accompanying Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial
Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the
Company's internal control over financial reporting based on our
audit.
We
conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require
that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether
effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all
material respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of
internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material
weakness exists, testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness
of internal control based on the assessed risk, and performing such other
procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We
believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
A
company's internal control over financial reporting is a process designed by, or
under the supervision of, the company's principal executive and principal
financial officers, or persons performing similar functions, and effected by the
company's board of directors, management, and other personnel to provide
reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the
preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles. A company's internal
control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1)
pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and
fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company;
(2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to
permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are
being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of
the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely
detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company's
assets that could have a material effect on the financial
statements.
Because
of the inherent limitations of internal control over financial reporting,
including the possibility of collusion or improper management override of
controls, material misstatements due to error or fraud may not be prevented or
detected on a timely basis. Also, projections of any evaluation of
the effectiveness of the internal control over financial reporting to future
periods are subject to the risk that the controls may become inadequate because
of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or
procedures may deteriorate.
In our
opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal
control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2007, based on the criteria
established in Internal Control — Integrated Framework issued by the Committee
of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission.
We have
also audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board (United States), the Company’s consolidated balance sheet as of
December 31, 2007 and the related consolidated statements of income,
stockholders’ equity, and cash flow and financial statement schedule for the
year ended December 31, 2007, and our report dated March 13, 2008 expressed
an unqualified opinion on those financial statements and schedule and included
an explanatory paragraph regarding the Company’s adoption of the provisions of
FASB Interpretation No. 48, “Accounting for Uncertainty in Income
Taxes.”
DELOITTE
& TOUCHE LLP
Parsippany,
New Jersey
March 13,
2008
LINCOLN
EDUCATIONAL SERVICES CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS
(In
thousands, except share amounts)
|
|
December
31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ASSETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CURRENT
ASSETS:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
|
$ |
3,502 |
|
|
$ |
6,461 |
|
Restricted
cash
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
920 |
|
Accounts
receivable, less allowance of $11,244 and $11,456 at December 31, 2007
and 2006, respectively
|
|
|
23,286 |
|
|
|
20,473 |
|
Inventories
|
|
|
2,540 |
|
|
|
2,438 |
|
Deferred
income taxes, net
|
|
|
4,575 |
|
|
|
4,827 |
|
Due
from federal programs
|
|
|
6,087 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Prepaid
expenses and other current assets
|
|
|
3,771 |
|
|
|
3,049 |
|
Total
current assets
|
|
|
43,761 |
|
|
|
38,168 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PROPERTY,
EQUIPMENT AND FACILITIES - At cost, net of accumulated depreciation and
amortization of $82,931 and $72,871 at December 31, 2007 and 2006,
respectively
|
|
|
106,564 |
|
|
|
94,368 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OTHER
ASSETS:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noncurrent
accounts receivable, less allowance of $159 and $80 at December 31, 2007
and 2006, respectively
|
|
|
1,608 |
|
|
|
723 |
|
Deferred
finance charges
|
|
|
827 |
|
|
|
1,019 |
|
Pension
plan assets, net
|
|
|
1,696 |
|
|
|
1,107 |
|
Deferred
income taxes, net
|
|
|
5,500 |
|
|
|
2,688 |
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
82,714 |
|
|
|
84,995 |
|
Other
assets, net
|
|
|
3,513 |
|
|
|
3,148 |
|
Total
other assets
|
|
|
95,858 |
|
|
|
93,680 |
|
TOTAL
|
|
$ |
246,183 |
|
|
$ |
226,216 |
|
See notes
to consolidated financial statements.
LINCOLN
EDUCATIONAL SERVICES CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS
(In
thousands, except share amounts)
(Continued)
|
|
December
31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES
AND STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CURRENT
LIABILITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
portion of long-term debt and lease obligations
|
|
$ |
204 |
|
|
$ |
91 |
|
Unearned
tuition
|
|
|
34,810 |
|
|
|
33,150 |
|
Accounts
payable
|
|
|
13,721 |
|
|
|
12,118 |
|
Accrued
expenses
|
|
|
10,079 |
|
|
|
10,335 |
|
Advance
payments of federal programs
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
557 |
|
Income
taxes payable
|
|
|
1,460 |
|
|
|
2,860 |
|
Other
short-term liabilities
|
|
|
1,439 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Total
current liabilities
|
|
|
61,713 |
|
|
|
59,111 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NONCURRENT
LIABILITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term
debt and lease obligations, net of current portion
|
|
|
15,174 |
|
|
|
9,769 |
|
Other
long-term liabilities
|
|
|
6,829 |
|
|
|
5,553 |
|
Total
liabilities
|
|
|
83,716 |
|
|
|
74,433 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
COMMITMENTS
AND CONTINGENCIES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
STOCKHOLDERS'
EQUITY:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred
stock, no par value - 10,000,000 shares authorized, no shares issued and
outstanding at December 31, 2007 and 2006
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Common
stock, no par value - authorized 100,000,000 shares at December 31, 2007
and 2006, issued and outstanding 25,888,348 shares at December 31, 2007
and 25,450,695 shares at December 31, 2006
|
|
|
120,379 |
|
|
|
120,182 |
|
Additional
paid-in capital
|
|
|
12,378 |
|
|
|
7,695 |
|
Deferred
compensation
|
|
|
(3,228 |
) |
|
|
(467 |
) |
Retained
earnings
|
|
|
35,024 |
|
|
|
26,784 |
|
Accumulated
other comprehensive loss
|
|
|
(2,086 |
) |
|
|
(2,411 |
) |
Total
stockholders' equity
|
|
|
162,467 |
|
|
|
151,783 |
|
TOTAL
|
|
$ |
246,183 |
|
|
$ |
226,216 |
|
See notes
to consolidated financial statements.
LINCOLN
EDUCATIONAL SERVICES CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF INCOME
(In
thousands, except per share amounts)
|
|
Year
Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
REVENUES
|
|
$ |
327,774 |
|
|
$ |
310,630 |
|
|
$ |
287,368 |
|
COSTS
AND EXPENSES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Educational
services and facilities
|
|
|
139,500 |
|
|
|
129,311 |
|
|
|
114,161 |
|
Selling,
general and administrative
|
|
|
162,396 |
|
|
|
151,136 |
|
|
|
138,125 |
|
Gain
on sale of assets
|
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
|
(435 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
Total
costs and expenses
|
|
|
301,881 |
|
|
|
280,012 |
|
|
|
252,279 |
|
OPERATING
INCOME
|
|
|
25,893 |
|
|
|
30,618 |
|
|
|
35,089 |
|
OTHER:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
income
|
|
|
180 |
|
|
|
981 |
|
|
|
775 |
|
Interest
expense
|
|
|
(2,341 |
) |
|
|
(2,291 |
) |
|
|
(2,892 |
) |
Other
income (loss)
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
(132 |
) |
|
|
243 |
|
INCOME
FROM CONTINUING OPERATIONS BEFORE INCOME TAXES
|
|
|
23,759 |
|
|
|
29,176 |
|
|
|
33,215 |
|
PROVISION
FOR INCOME TAXES
|
|
|
9,932 |
|
|
|
12,092 |
|
|
|
12,931 |
|
INCOME
FROM CONTINUING OPERATIONS
|
|
|
13,827 |
|
|
|
17,084 |
|
|
|
20,284 |
|
LOSS
FROM DISCONTINUED OPERATIONS, NET OF INCOME TAXES
|
|
|
(5,487 |
) |
|
|
(1,532 |
) |
|
|
(1,575 |
) |
NET
INCOME
|
|
$ |
8,340 |
|
|
$ |
15,552 |
|
|
$ |
18,709 |
|
Basic
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings
per share from continuing operations
|
|
$ |
0.54 |
|
|
$ |
0.67 |
|
|
$ |
0.86 |
|
Loss
per share from discontinued operations
|
|
|
(0.21 |
) |
|
|
(0.06 |
) |
|
|
(0.06 |
) |
Net
income per share
|
|
$ |
0.33 |
|
|
$ |
0.61 |
|
|
$ |
0.80 |
|
Diluted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings
per share from continuing operations
|
|
$ |
0.53 |
|
|
$ |
0.65 |
|
|
$ |
0.83 |
|
Loss
per share from discontinued operations
|
|
|
(0.21 |
) |
|
|
(0.05 |
) |
|
|
(0.07 |
) |
Net
income per share
|
|
$ |
0.32 |
|
|
$ |
0.60 |
|
|
$ |
0.76 |
|
Weighted
average number of common shares outstanding:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
25,479 |
|
|
|
25,336 |
|
|
|
23,475 |
|
Diluted
|
|
|
26,090 |
|
|
|
26,086 |
|
|
|
24,503 |
|
See notes
to consolidated financial statements
LINCOLN
EDUCATIONAL SERVICES CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
(In
thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loan
|
|
|
Retained
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional
|
|
|
|
|
|
Receivable
|
|
|
Earnings
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common
Stock
|
|
|
Paid-in
|
|
|
Deferred
|
|
|
From
|
|
|
(Accumulated
|
|
|
Comprehensive
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Capital
|
|
|
Compensation
|
|
|
Stockholders
|
|
|
Deficit)
|
|
|
Loss
|
|
|
Total
|
|
BALANCE
- December 31, 2004
|
|
|
21,699 |
|
|
$ |
62,482 |
|
|
$ |
3,262 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
(181 |
) |
|
$ |
(7,477 |
) |
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
58,086 |
|
Net
income
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
18,709 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
18,709 |
|
Issuance
of common stock, net of issuance expenses
|
|
|
3,177 |
|
|
|
56,255 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
56,255 |
|
Stock-based
compensation expense:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted
Stock
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
420 |
|
|
|
(360 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
60 |
|
Stock
Options
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,286 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,286 |
|
Stockholders
loan repayment
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
181 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
181 |
|
Tax
benefit of options exercised
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
697 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
697 |
|
Exercise
of stock options
|
|
|
271 |
|
|
|
716 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
716 |
|
BALANCE
- December 31, 2005
|
|
|
25,168 |
|
|
|
119,453 |
|
|
|
5,665 |
|
|
|
(360 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
11,232 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
135,990 |
|
Net
income
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
15,552 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
15,552 |
|
Reduction
in estimated stock issuance expenses
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
150 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
150 |
|
Stock-based
compensation expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted
Stock
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
300 |
|
|
|
(107 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
193 |
|
Stock
Options
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,231 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,231 |
|
Tax
benefit of options exercised
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
499 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
499 |
|
Exercise
of stock options
|
|
|
264 |
|
|
|
579 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
579 |
|
Initial
adoption of SFAS No. 158, net of taxes
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(2,411 |
) |
|
|
(2,411 |
) |
BALANCE
- December 31, 2006
|
|
|
25,451 |
|
|
|
120,182 |
|
|
|
7,695 |
|
|
|
(467 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
26,784 |
|
|
|
(2,411 |
) |
|
|
151,783 |
|
Net
income
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
8,340 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
8,340 |
|
Initial
adoption of FIN 48
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(100 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(100 |
) |
Employee
pension plan
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
325 |
|
|
|
325 |
|
Stock-based
compensation expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted
Stock
|
|
|
217 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
3,155 |
|
|
|
(2,761 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
394 |
|
Stock
Options
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,455 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,455 |
|
Tax
benefit of options exercised
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
73 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
73 |
|
Exercise
of stock options
|
|
|
220 |
|
|
|
197 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
197 |
|
BALANCE
- December 31, 2007
|
|
|
25,888 |
|
|
$ |
120,379 |
|
|
$ |
12,378 |
|
|
$ |
(3,228 |
) |
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
35,024 |
|
|
$ |
(2,086 |
) |
|
$ |
162,467 |
|
See notes
to consolidated financial statements.
LINCOLN
EDUCATIONAL SERVICES CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(In
thousands)
|
|
Year
Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH
FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income
|
|
$ |
8,340 |
|
|
$ |
15,552 |
|
|
$ |
18,709 |
|
Adjustments
to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating
activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation
and amortization
|
|
|
15,741 |
|
|
|
14,866 |
|
|
|
13,064 |
|
Amortization
of deferred finance charges
|
|
|
192 |
|
|
|
192 |
|
|
|
215 |
|
Write-off
of deferred finance costs
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
365 |
|
Deferred
income taxes
|
|
|
(2,761 |
) |
|
|
(3,655 |
) |
|
|
340 |
|
Gain
on disposition of assets
|
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
|
(437 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
Impairment
of goodwill and long-lived assets
|
|
|
3,099 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Fixed
asset donations
|
|
|
(26 |
) |
|
|
(22 |
) |
|
|
(243 |
) |
Provision
for doubtful accounts
|
|
|
17,767 |
|
|
|
15,590 |
|
|
|
11,188 |
|
Stock-based
compensation expense
|
|
|
1,849 |
|
|
|
1,424 |
|
|
|
1,346 |
|
Tax
benefit associated with exercise of stock options
|
|
|
(73 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
697 |
|
Deferred
rent
|
|
|
630 |
|
|
|
1,081 |
|
|
|
1,670 |
|
(Increase)
decrease in assets, net of acquisitions:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts
receivable
|
|
|
(21,465 |
) |
|
|
(21,870 |
) |
|
|
(11,676 |
) |
Inventories
|
|
|
(102 |
) |
|
|
(587 |
) |
|
|
(65 |
) |
Prepaid
expenses and current assets
|
|
|
(1,957 |
) |
|
|
(374 |
) |
|
|
(300 |
) |
Due
from federal funds
|
|
|
(6,644 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Other
assets
|
|
|
(740 |
) |
|
|
1,181 |
|
|
|
54 |
|
Increase
(decrease) in liabilities, net of acquisitions:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts
payable
|
|
|
(284 |
) |
|
|
(1,441 |
) |
|
|
1,801 |
|
Other
liabilities
|
|
|
1,926 |
|
|
|
(157 |
) |
|
|
(468 |
) |
Income
taxes payable/prepaid
|
|
|
(1,181 |
) |
|
|
(1,225 |
) |
|
|
4,068 |
|
Accrued
expenses
|
|
|
(221 |
) |
|
|
(870 |
) |
|
|
(1,715 |
) |
Unearned
tuition
|
|
|
1,660 |
|
|
|
(3,990 |
) |
|
|
(77 |
) |
Total
adjustments
|
|
|
7,395 |
|
|
|
(294 |
) |
|
|
20,257 |
|
Net
cash provided by operating activities
|
|
|
15,735 |
|
|
|
15,258 |
|
|
|
38,966 |
|
CASH
FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted
cash
|
|
|
920 |
|
|
|
(920 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Capital
expenditures
|
|
|
(24,766 |
) |
|
|
(19,341 |
) |
|
|
(22,621 |
) |
Proceeds
from sale of property and equipment
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
973 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Acquisitions,
net of cash acquired
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(32,872 |
) |
|
|
(27,776 |
) |
Net
cash used in investing activities
|
|
|
(23,830 |
) |
|
|
(52,160 |
) |
|
|
(50,397 |
) |
CASH
FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds
from borrowings
|
|
|
26,500 |
|
|
|
14,000 |
|
|
|
31,000 |
|
Payments
on borrowings
|
|
|
(21,500 |
) |
|
|
(21,214 |
) |
|
|
(66,750 |
) |
Payments
of deferred finance fees
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(848 |
) |
Proceeds
from exercise of stock options
|
|
|
197 |
|
|
|
579 |
|
|
|
716 |
|
Tax
benefit associated with exercise of stock options
|
|
|
73 |
|
|
|
499 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Principal
payments under capital lease obligations
|
|
|
(134 |
) |
|
|
(908 |
) |
|
|
(311 |
) |
Repayment
from shareholder loans
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
181 |
|
Proceeds
from issuance of common stock, net of issuance costs of
$2,845
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
150 |
|
|
|
56,255 |
|
Net
cash provided by (used in) financing activities
|
|
|
5,136 |
|
|
|
(6,894 |
) |
|
|
20,243 |
|
NET
(DECREASE) INCREASE IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS
|
|
|
(2,959 |
) |
|
|
(43,796 |
) |
|
|
8,812 |
|
CASH
AND CASH EQUIVALENTS—Beginning of year
|
|
|
6,461 |
|
|
|
50,257 |
|
|
|
41,445 |
|
CASH
AND CASH EQUIVALENTS—End of year
|
|
$ |
3,502 |
|
|
$ |
6,461 |
|
|
$ |
50,257 |
|
LINCOLN
EDUCATIONAL SERVICES CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(In
thousands)
(Continued)
|
|
Year
Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SUPPLEMENTAL
DISCLOSURES OF CASH FLOW INFORMATION:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
paid during the year for:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
|
|
$ |
2,305 |
|
|
$ |
2,243 |
|
|
$ |
2,358 |
|
Income
taxes
|
|
$ |
10,148 |
|
|
$ |
15,799 |
|
|
$ |
11,025 |
|
SUPPLEMENTAL
SCHEDULE OF NONCASH INVESTING AND FINANCING ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
paid during the period for:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair
value of assets acquired
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
47,511 |
|
|
$ |
32,335 |
|
Net
cash paid for the acquisitions
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(32,872 |
) |
|
|
(27,776 |
) |
Liabilities
assumed
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
14,639 |
|
|
$ |
4,559 |
|
Fixed
assets acquired in capital lease transactions
|
|
$ |
652 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
Fixed
assets acquired in noncash transactions
|
|
$ |
2,812 |
|
|
$ |
101 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
See notes
to consolidated financial statements.
LINCOLN
EDUCATIONAL SERVICES CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER
31, 2007
(In
thousands, except share and per share amounts and unless otherwise
stated)
1.
|
SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING
POLICIES
|
Business
Activities—Lincoln Educational Services Corporation and Subsidiaries (the
"Company") is a diversified provider of career-oriented post-secondary
education. The Company offers recent high school graduates and working adults
degree and diploma programs in five principal areas of study: Automotive
Technology, Health Sciences (which includes programs for licensed practical
nursing (LPN), medical administrative assistants, medical assistants, pharmacy
technicians, medical coding and billing and dental assisting), Business and
Information Technology, Hospitality Services (spa and culinary) and Skilled
Trades. We currently have 34 schools in 17 states across the United
States.
Principles of
Consolidation—The accompanying consolidated financial statements include
the accounts of Lincoln Educational Services Corporation and its wholly-owned
subsidiaries. All significant intercompany accounts and transactions have been
eliminated.
Revenue
Recognition—Revenue is derived primarily from programs taught at the
schools. Tuition revenue and one-time fees, such as nonrefundable application
fees, and course material fees are recognized on a straight-line basis over the
length of the applicable program. If a student withdraws from a program prior to
a specified date, any paid but unearned tuition is refunded. Other revenues,
such as textbook sales, tool sales and contract training revenues are recognized
as services are performed or goods are delivered. On an individual student
basis, tuition earned in excess of cash received is recorded as accounts
receivable, and cash received in excess of tuition earned is recorded as
unearned tuition. Refunds are calculated and paid in accordance with federal,
state and accrediting agency standards.
Cash and Cash
Equivalents—Cash and cash equivalents include all cash balances and
highly liquid short-term investments, which mature within three months of
purchase.
Restricted
Cash— Restricted cash represents amounts received from the federal and
state governments under various student aid grant and loan programs. These funds
are either received prior to the completion of the authorization and
disbursement process for the benefit of the student or immediately prior to that
authorization. Restricted funds are held in separate bank accounts. Once the
authorization and disbursement process is completed and authorization obtained,
the funds are transferred to unrestricted accounts, and these funds then become
available for use in the Company’s current operations. As of December
31, 2006 the Company was subject to Heightened Cash Monitoring, Type 1 Status by
the DOE however as of December 30, 2007 the Company the Company is no longer
subject to this restriction. Therefore, the Company had no
restrictions on cash at December 31, 2007.
Accounts
Receivable—The Company reports accounts receivable at net realizable
value, which is equal to the gross receivable less an estimated allowance for
uncollectible accounts.
Allowance for
uncollectible accounts—Based upon experience and judgment, we establish
an allowance for uncollectible accounts with respect to tuition receivables. We
use an internal group of collectors, augmented by third-party collectors as
deemed appropriate, in our collection efforts. In establishing our allowance for
uncollectible accounts, we consider, among other things, a student's status
(in-school or out-of-school), whether or not additional financial aid funding
will be collected from Title IV Programs or other sources, whether or not a
student is currently making payments, and overall collection history. Changes in
trends in any of these areas may impact the allowance for uncollectible
accounts. The receivables balances of withdrawn students with delinquent
obligations are reserved for based on our collection history.
Inventories—Inventories
consist mainly of textbooks, tools and supplies. Inventories are valued at the
lower of cost or market on a first-in, first-out basis.
Property,
Equipment and Facilities—Depreciation and
Amortization—Property, equipment and facilities are stated at cost. Major
renewals and improvements are capitalized, while repairs and maintenance are
expensed when incurred. Upon the retirement, sale or other disposition of
assets, costs and related accumulated depreciation are eliminated from the
accounts and any gain or loss is reflected in operating income. For financial
statement purposes, depreciation of property and equipment is computed using the
straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the assets, and
amortization of leasehold improvements is computed over the lesser of the term
of the lease or its estimated useful life.
Rent
Expense—Rent expense related to operating leases where scheduled rent
increases exist, is determined by expensing the total amount of rent due over
the life of the operating lease on a straight-line basis. The difference between
the rent paid under the terms of the lease and the rent expensed on a
straight-line basis is included in accrued expenses and other long-term
liabilities on the accompanying consolidated balance sheets.
Deferred Finance
Charges—These
charges consist of $0.3 million and $0.5 million as of
December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively, related to the long-term debt and
$0.5 million as of December 31, 2007 and 2006, related to the finance
obligation. These amounts are being amortized as an increase in interest expense
over the respective life of the debt or finance obligation.
Advertising
Costs—Costs related to advertising are expensed as incurred and
approximated $31.1 million, $28.9 million and $25.6 million for
the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively. These
amounts are included in selling, general and administrative expenses in the
consolidated statement of income.
Bonus
costs—We accrue the estimated cost of our bonus programs using current
financial and statistical information as compared to targeted financial
achievements and actual student graduate outcomes. Although we believe our
estimated liability recorded for bonuses is reasonable, actual results could
differ and require adjustment of the recorded balance.
Goodwill and
Other Intangible Assets— The Company tests its goodwill for impairment
annually, or whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate an impairment
may have occurred, by comparing its fair value to its carrying value. Impairment
may result from, among other things, deterioration in the performance of the
acquired business, adverse market conditions, adverse changes in applicable laws
or regulations, including changes that restrict the activities of the acquired
business, and a variety of other circumstances. If the Company determines that
an impairment has occurred, it is required to record a write-down of the
carrying value and charge the impairment as an operating expense in the period
the determination is made. In evaluating the recoverability of the carrying
value of goodwill and other indefinite-lived intangible assets, the Company must
make assumptions regarding estimated future cash flows and other factors to
determine the fair value of the acquired assets. Changes in strategy or market
conditions could significantly impact these judgments in the future and require
an adjustment to the recorded balances.
As
discussed in Note 19, as a result of a decision to close three of our campuses
we conducted a review of our goodwill as of June 30, 2007. In
connections with that review, we recognized a non-cash impairment charge of
approximately $2.1 million as of June 30, 2007. At December 31,
2007 and 2006, the Company tested its goodwill for impairment utilizing a market
capitalization approach and determined that it did not have an
impairment.
Concentration of
Credit Risk—Financial instruments that potentially subject the Company to
concentrations of credit risk consist principally of temporary cash investments
and student receivables.
The
Company places its cash and cash equivalents with high credit quality financial
institutions. The Company's cash balances with financial institutions typically
exceed the Federal Deposit Insurance limit of $100,000. The Company's cash
balances on deposit at December 31, 2007, exceeded the balance insured by
the FDIC by approximately $2.0 million. The Company has not experienced any
losses to date on its invested cash.
The
Company extends credit for tuition and fees to many of its students. The credit
risk with respect to these accounts receivable is mitigated through the
students' participation in federally funded financial aid programs unless
students withdraw prior to the receipt of federal funds for those students. In
addition, the remaining tuition receivables are primarily comprised of smaller
individual amounts due from students.
With
respect to student receivables, the Company had no significant concentrations of
credit risk as of December 31, 2007, and 2006.
Use of Estimates
in the Preparation of Financial Statements—The preparation of financial
statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and
assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and
disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the consolidated
financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during
the period. On an ongoing basis, the Company evaluates the estimates and
assumptions, including those related to revenue recognition, bad debts, fixed
assets, income taxes, benefit plans and certain accruals. Actual results
could differ from those estimates.
Stock Based
Compensation Plans—The Company has stock-based compensation plans as
discussed further in Note 11. In December 2004, the Financial Accounting
Standards Board issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123
(revised 2004), Share-Based
Payment, (“FAS 123R”). This Statement requires companies to expense the
estimated fair value of stock options and similar equity instruments issued to
employees over the requisite service period. On December 1, 2005, the Company
adopted FAS 123R in advance of the mandatory adoption date of the first quarter
of 2006 to better reflect the full cost of employee compensation. The Company
adopted FAS 123R using the modified prospective method, which requires the
Company to record compensation expense for all awards granted after the date of
adoption, and for the unvested portion of previously granted awards that remain
outstanding at the date of adoption. Prior to the adoption of FAS 123R, the
Company recognized stock-based compensation under FAS 123 “Stock Based Compensation”
and as a result, the implementation of FAS 123R did not have a material impact
on the Company’s financial presentation.
The fair
value concepts were not changed significantly under FAS 123R from those utilized
under FAS No. 123; however, in adopting this Standard, companies must choose
among alternative valuation models and amortization assumptions. After assessing
these alternatives, the Company decided to continue using the Black-Scholes
valuation model. However, the Company also decided to utilize straight-line
amortization of compensation expense over the requisite service period of the
grant, rather than over the individual grant requisite period as chosen under
FAS 123. Under FAS 123, the Company had recognized stock option forfeitures as
they incurred. With the adoption of FAS 123R, the Company made an estimate of
expected forfeitures calculation upon grant issuance.
Income
Taxes—Deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for the
estimated future tax consequences attributable to differences between financial
statement carrying amounts of assets and liabilities and their respective tax
bases. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are measured using enacted tax rates
expected to apply to taxable income in the years in which those temporary
differences are expected to be recovered or settled. The effect on deferred tax
assets and liabilities of changes in tax rates is recognized in income in the
period that includes the enactment date.
Impairment of
Long-Lived Assets—The Company reviews the carrying value of our
long-lived assets and identifiable intangibles for possible impairment whenever
events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amounts may not be
recoverable. The Company assesses the potential impairment of property and
equipment and identifiable intangibles whenever events or changes in
circumstances indicate that the carrying value may not be recoverable. The
Company evaluates long-lived assets for impairment by examining estimated future
cash flows. These cash flows are evaluated by using weighted probability
techniques as well as comparisons of past performance against projections.
Assets may also be evaluated by identifying independent market values. If the
Company determines that an asset’s carrying value is impaired, it will record a
write-down of the carrying value of the asset and charge the impairment as an
operating expense in the period in which the determination is made.
As
discussed in Note 19, as a result of a decision to close three of our campuses
we conducted a review of our long-lived assets as of June 30,
2007. In connections with that review, we recognized a non-cash
impairment charge of approximately $0.9 million as of June 30,
2007.
Start-up
Costs—Costs related to the start of new campuses are expensed as
incurred.
2.
|
RECENT ACCOUNTING
PRONOUNCEMENTS
|
In
December 2007, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued
Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 141 (revised
2007), "Business Combinations" (“SFAS No. 141R”). The Statement establishes
revised principles and requirements for how the Company will recognize and
measure assets and liabilities acquired in a business combination. The Statement
is effective for business combinations completed on or after the beginning of
the first annual reporting period beginning on or after December 15, 2008,
which begins January 1, 2009 for the Company. The adoption
of the provision of SFAS No. 141R is not expected to have a material effect on
the Company’s consolidated financial statements.
In
December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 160, "Noncontrolling Interests in
Consolidated Financial Statements, an amendment of Accounting Research Bulletin
(“ARB”) No. 51". The Statement establishes accounting and reporting
standards for the noncontrolling interest in a subsidiary and for the
deconsolidation of a subsidiary. The Statement is effective on or after the
beginning of the first annual reporting period beginning on or after
December 15, 2008, which begins January 1, 2009 for the
Company. The adoption of the provision of SFAS No. 160R is not
expected to have a material effect on the Company’s consolidated financial
statements.
In
February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 159 “The Fair Value Option for Financial
Assets and Financial Liabilities”, providing companies with an option to
report selected financial assets and liabilities at fair value. The
objective of SFAS No. 159 is to reduce both complexity in accounting for
financial instruments and the volatility in earnings caused by measuring related
assets and liabilities differently. Generally accepted accounting
principles have required different measurement attributes for different assets
and liabilities that can create artificial volatility in earnings. SFAS No. 159
helps to mitigate this type of accounting-induced volatility by enabling
companies to report related assets and liabilities at fair value, which would
likely reduce the need for companies to comply with detailed rules for hedge
accounting. SFAS No. 159 also establishes presentation and disclosure
requirements designed to facilitate comparisons between companies that choose
different measurement attributes for similar types of assets and
liabilities. SFAS No. 159 requires companies to provide additional
information that will help investors and other users of financial statements to
more easily understand the effect of the Company’s choice to use fair value on
its earnings. It also requires entities to display the fair value of those
assets and liabilities for which the Company has chosen to use fair value on the
face of the balance sheet. SFAS No. 159 will be effective for the Company
as of January 1, 2008. The adoption of the provision of SFAS No.
159 did not have a material effect on the Company’s consolidated financial
statements.
In
September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 158, “Employers’ Accounting for Defined
Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans, an amendment of FASB Statements
No. 87, 88, 106, and 132(R).” Among other items, SFAS No. 158 requires
recognition of the overfunded or underfunded status of an entity’s defined
benefit postretirement plan as an asset or liability in the financial
statements, requires the measurement of defined benefit postretirement plan
assets and obligations as of the end of the employer’s fiscal year, and requires
recognition of the funded status of defined benefit postretirement plans in
other comprehensive income. The Company adopted SFAS No. 158 on
December 31, 2006. The incremental effects of applying SFAS No. 158
on the Company’s December 31, 2006 consolidated financial statements, on a line
by line basis, are as follows:
|
|
Balances
Before
Adoption
of
Statement
158
|
|
|
Adjustments
|
|
|
Balances
After
Adoption
of
Statement
158
|
|
Pension
plan assets, net
|
|
$ |
5,169 |
|
|
$ |
(4,062 |
) |
|
$ |
1,107 |
|
Deferred
income taxes
|
|
|
1,037 |
|
|
|
1,651 |
|
|
|
2,688 |
|
Accumulated
other comprehensive income
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
2,411 |
|
|
|
2,411 |
|
In
September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements.”
SFAS No. 157 defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair
value in GAAP, and expands disclosures about fair value measurements. This
Statement applies under other accounting pronouncements that require or permit
fair value measurements, the Board having previously concluded in those
accounting pronouncements that fair value is the relevant measurement attribute.
Accordingly, this Statement does not require any new fair value measurements.
The provisions of SFAS No. 157 are effective for the Company as of January 1,
2008. The adoption of the provision of SFAS No. 157 did not have a material
effect on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.
In
September 2006, the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) issued Staff
Accounting Bulletin (“SAB”) No. 108 which provides interpretive guidance on how
the effects of the carryover or reversal of prior year unrecorded misstatements
should be considered in quantifying a current year misstatement. SAB No. 108 is
effective for the Company as of January 1, 2007. The adoption of the provision
of SAB No. 108 had no effect on the Company’s consolidated financial
statements.
In June
2006, the FASB issued FASB Interpretation (“FIN”) No. 48, “Accounting for Uncertainty in Income
Taxes.” FIN No. 48 clarifies the accounting for uncertainty in income
taxes recognized in an enterprise’s financial statements in accordance with FASB
SFAS No. 109, “Accounting for
Income Taxes”, which was adopted by the Company on January 1, 2007. FIN
No. 48 prescribes a recognition threshold and a measurement attribute for the
financial statement recognition and measurement of tax positions taken or
expected to be taken in a tax return. For those benefits to be recognized, a tax
position must be more-likely-than-not to be sustained upon examination by taxing
authorities. The amount recognized is measured as the largest amount of benefit
that is greater than 50 percent likely of being realized upon ultimate
settlement. The adoption of FIN No. 48 resulted in a cumulative effect
adjustment to retained earnings as of January 1, 2007 of $0.1
million.
In March
2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 156, “Accounting for Servicing of
Financial Assets.” SFAS No. 156 provides guidance addressing the
recognition and measurement of separately recognized servicing assets and
liabilities, common with mortgage securitization activities, and provides an
approach to simplify efforts to obtain hedge accounting treatment. SFAS No. 156
was adopted on January 1, 2007. The adoption of the provision of SFAS No. 156
had no effect on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.
In
February 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 155, “Accounting for Certain Hybrid
Financial Instruments.” SFAS No. 155 is effective beginning January 1,
2007. The adoption of the provision of SFAS No. 155 had no effect on the
Company’s consolidated financial statements.
In June
2005, the FASB issued SFAS No. 154,“Accounting Changes and Error
Corrections, a replacement of APB Opinion No. 20 and FASB Statement No.
3.” SFAS No. 154 applies to all voluntary changes in accounting
principle, and changes the requirements for accounting for and reporting of a
change in accounting principle. SFAS No. 154 requires retrospective
application to prior periods’ financial statements of a voluntary change in
accounting principle unless it is impracticable. Accounting Principles Boards
(“APB”) Opinion No. 20 previously required that most voluntary changes in
accounting principle be recognized by including in net income of the period of
the change the cumulative effect of changing to the new accounting principle.
SFAS No. 154 requires that a change in method of depreciation, amortization, or
depletion for long-lived, nonfinancial assets be accounted for as a change in
accounting estimate that is affected by a change in accounting principle. APB
Opinion No. 20 previously required that such a change be reported as a change in
accounting principle. The Company adopted SFAS No. 154 on January 1, 2006. The
adoption of the provisions of SFAS No. 154 had no effect on the Company’s
consolidated financial statements.
In March
2005, the FASB issued FIN 47, “Accounting for Conditional Asset
Retirement Obligations”. FIN 47 clarifies that a conditional asset
retirement obligation, as used in SFAS 143, “Accounting for Asset Retirement
Obligations,” refers to a legal obligation to perform an asset retirement
activity in which the timing and/or method of the settlement are conditional on
a future event that may or may not be within the control of the entity.
Accordingly, the Company is required to recognize a liability for the fair value
of a conditional asset retirement obligation if the fair value can be reasonably
estimated. The Company adopted FIN 47 on January 1, 2006. The adoption of the
provisions of FIN 47 had no effect on the Company’s consolidated financial
statements.
3.
FINANCIAL AID AND
REGULATORY COMPLIANCE
Financial
Aid
The
Company’s schools and students participate in a variety of government-sponsored
financial aid programs that assist students in paying the cost of their
education. The largest source of such support is the federal programs of student
financial assistance under Title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as
amended, commonly referred to as the Title IV Programs, which are administered
by the U.S. Department of Education (or "DOE"). During the years ended
December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, approximately 80%, 80% and 80%,
respectively, of net revenues were indirectly derived from funds distributed
under Title IV Programs.
Regulatory
Compliance
To
participate in Title IV Programs, a school must be authorized to offer its
programs of instruction by relevant state education agencies, be accredited by
an accrediting commission recognized by the DOE and be certified as an eligible
institution by the DOE. For this reason, the schools are subject to extensive
regulatory requirements imposed by all of these entities. After the schools
receive the required certifications by the appropriate entities, the schools
must demonstrate their compliance with the DOE regulations of the Title IV
Programs on an ongoing basis. Included in these regulations is the requirement
that the Company must satisfy specific standards of financial responsibility.
The DOE evaluates institutions for compliance with these standards each year,
based upon the institutions' annual audited financial statements, as well as
following a change in ownership of the institution. Under regulations which took
effect July 1, 1998, the DOE calculates the institution's composite score
for financial responsibility based on its (i) equity ratio, which measures
the institution's capital resources, ability to borrow and financial viability;
(ii) primary reserve ratio, which measures the institution's ability to
support current operations from expendable resources; and (iii) net income
ratio, which measures the institution's ability to operate at a profit. This
composite score can range from -1 to +3.
An institution that does not meet the
DOE's minimum composite score requirements of 1.5 may establish its financial
responsibility by posting a letter of credit or complying with additional
monitoring procedures as defined by the DOE. Based on audited financial statements
for the 2007, 2006 and 2005 fiscal years our calculations result in a composite
score of 1.8, 1.7 and 2.5,
respectively. Beginning December 30, 2004 and for a period of three
years, all of our institutions were placed on "Heightened Cash Monitoring, Type
1 status." As a result, we were subject to a less favorable Title IV fund
payment system that required us to credit student accounts before drawing down
Title IV funds and also required us to timely notify the DOE with respect to
certain enumerated oversight and financial events. The DOE has notified us that, as of December
31, 2007, we are no longer
subject to Heightened Cash Monitoring, Type 1 Status.
For the
years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005 the Company was in compliance with
the standards established by the DOE requiring that no individual DOE reporting
entity can receive more than 90% of its revenue, determined on a cash basis,
from Title IV, HEA Program Funds.
4.
|
WEIGHTED AVERAGE COMMON
SHARES
|
The
weighted average numbers of common shares used to compute basic and diluted
income per share for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005,
respectively, in thousands, were as follows:
|
|
Year
Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
Basic
shares outstanding
|
|
|
25,479 |
|
|
|
25,336 |
|
|
|
23,475 |
|
Dilutive
effect of stock options
|
|
|
611 |
|
|
|
750 |
|
|
|
1,028 |
|
Diluted
shares outstanding
|
|
|
26,090 |
|
|
|
26,086 |
|
|
|
24,503 |
|
For the
years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, options to acquire 608,208,
288,500 and 184,000 shares, respectively, were excluded from the above table as
the result on reported earnings per share would have been
antidilutive.
On May
22, 2006, the Company acquired all of the outstanding common stock of New
England Institute of Technology at Palm Beach, Inc. (“FLA”) for approximately
$40.1 million. The purchase price was $32.9 million, net of cash acquired plus
the assumption of a mortgage note for $7.2 million. The FLA purchase price has
been allocated to identifiable net assets with the excess of the purchase price
over the estimated fair value of the net assets acquired recorded as
goodwill.
On
December 1, 2005, the Company acquired all of the rights, title and interest in
the assets of Euphoria Institute LLC (“EUP”) for approximately $9.2 million, net
of cash acquired.
On
January 11, 2005, the Company acquired all of the rights, title and interest in
the assets of New England Technical Institute (“NETI”) for approximately $18.8
million, net of cash acquired.
The
consolidated financial statements include the results of operations from the
respective acquisition dates. The purchase price has been allocated to
identifiable net assets with the excess of the purchase price over the estimated
fair value of the net assets acquired recorded as goodwill. None of the
acquisitions were deemed material to the Company’s consolidated financial
statements.
The
following table summarizes the estimated fair value of assets acquired and
liabilities assumed at the date of acquisition:
|
|
FLA
May
22, 2006
|
|
|
EUP
December
1, 2005
|
|
|
NETI
January
11, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property,
equipment and facilities
|
|
$ |
20,609 |
|
|
$ |
793 |
|
|
$ |
1,000 |
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
24,710 |
|
|
|
9,019 |
|
|
|
18,464 |
|
Identified
intangibles:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Student
contracts
|
|
|
350 |
|
|
|
130 |
|
|
|
770 |
|
Trade
name
|
|
|
280 |
|
|
|
180 |
|
|
|
600 |
|
Curriculum
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
700 |
|
Non-compete
|
|
|
200 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Other
assets
|
|
|
450 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Current
assets, excluding cash acquired
|
|
|
912 |
|
|
|
125 |
|
|
|
782 |
|
Total
liabilities assumed
|
|
|
(14,639
|
) |
|
|
(998
|
) |
|
|
(3,561
|
) |
Cost
of acquisition, net of cash acquired
|
|
$ |
32,872 |
|
|
$ |
9,249 |
|
|
$ |
18,755 |
|
6.
|
GOODWILL AND OTHER
INTANGIBLES
|
Changes
in the carrying amount of goodwill during the years ended December 31, 2007
and 2006 are as follows (in thousands):
Goodwill
balance as of December 31, 2005
|
|
$ |
59,467 |
|
Goodwill
acquired pursuant to business acquisition-FLA
|
|
|
24,710 |
|
Goodwill
adjustments
|
|
|
818 |
|
Goodwill
balance as of December 31, 2006
|
|
|
84,995 |
|
Goodwill
adjustments
|
|
|
(146 |
) |
Goodwill
impairment
|
|
|
(2,135 |
) |
Goodwill
balance as of December 31, 2007
|
|
$ |
82,714 |
|
As
described further in Note 19, during the year ended December 31, 2007, the
Company recorded a goodwill impairment charge as a result of its decision to
cease operations at three of its campuses.
Identified
intangible assets, which are included in other assets in the accompanying
consolidated balance sheets, consisted of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
At
December 31, 2007
|
|
|
At
December 31, 2006
|
|
|
|
Weighted
Average
Amortization
Period
(years)
|
|
|
Gross
Carrying
Amount
|
|
|
Accumulated
Amortization
|
|
|
Gross
Carrying
Amount
|
|
|
Accumulated
Amortization
|
|
Student
Contracts
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
$ |
2,215 |
|
|
$ |
2,212 |
|
|
$ |
2,200 |
|
|
$ |
2,010 |
|
Trade
name
|
|
Indefinite
|
|
|
|
1,270 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,270 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Accreditation
|
|
Indefinite
|
|
|
|
307 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Curriculum
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
700 |
|
|
|
208 |
|
|
|
700 |
|
|
|
138 |
|
Non-compete
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
201 |
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
201 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
4,693 |
|
|
$ |
2,485 |
|
|
$ |
4,371 |
|
|
$ |
2,173 |
|
The
increase in accreditation assets was due to the purchase of a new nursing
program on March 5, 2007.
Amortization
of intangible assets for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005 was
approximately $0.3 million, $0.5 million and $0.7 million,
respectively.
The
following table summarizes the estimated future amortization
expense:
Year Ending December
31,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
$ |
113 |
|
2009
|
|
|
110 |
|
2010
|
|
|
110 |
|
2011
|
|
|
86 |
|
2012
|
|
|
70 |
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
142 |
|
|
|
$ |
631 |
|
7.
|
PROPERTY, EQUIPMENT AND
FACILITIES
|
Property,
equipment and facilities consist of the following:
|
|
Useful
life (years)
|
|
|
At
December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
Land
|
|
-
|
|
|
$ |
13,563 |
|
|
$ |
13,563 |
|
Buildings
and improvements
|
|
1-25
|
|
|
|
104,484 |
|
|
|
97,914 |
|
Equipment,
furniture and fixtures
|
|
1-12
|
|
|
|
61,102 |
|
|
|
52,311 |
|
Vehicles
|
|
1-7
|
|
|
|
2,120 |
|
|
|
1,915 |
|
Construction
in progress
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
8,226 |
|
|
|
1,536 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
189,495 |
|
|
|
167,239 |
|
Less
accumulated depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(82,931 |
) |
|
|
(72,871 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
106,564 |
|
|
$ |
94,368 |
|
Included
above in equipment, furniture and fixtures are assets acquired under capital
leases as of December 31, 2007 and 2006 of $6.6 million and
$6.0 million, respectively, net of accumulated depreciation of
$5.9 million and $5.7 million, respectively.
Included
above in buildings and improvements is capitalized interest as of
December 31, 2007 and 2006 of $0.5 million and $0.4 million,
respectively, net of accumulated depreciation of $0.1 million and
$0.1 million, respectively.
Depreciation
and amortization expense of property, equipment and facilities was
$14.5 million, $13.0 million and $11.2 million for the years
ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively.
Accrued
expenses consist of the following:
|
|
At
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
Accrued
compensation and benefits
|
|
$ |
5,888 |
|
|
$ |
6,255 |
|
Other
accrued expenses
|
|
|
4,191 |
|
|
|
4,080 |
|
|
|
$ |
10,079 |
|
|
$ |
10,335 |
|
9.
|
LONG-TERM DEBT AND LEASE
OBLIGATIONS
|
Long-term
debt and lease obligations consist of the following:
|
|
At
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
Credit
agreement (a)
|
|
$ |
5,000 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
Finance
obligation (b)
|
|
|
9,672 |
|
|
|
9,672 |
|
Automobile
loans
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
37 |
|
Capital
leases-computers (with rates ranging from 2.9% to 8.7%)
|
|
|
690 |
|
|
|
151 |
|
|
|
|
15,378 |
|
|
|
9,860 |
|
Less
current maturities
|
|
|
(204 |
) |
|
|
(91 |
) |
|
|
$ |
15,174 |
|
|
$ |
9,769 |
|
(a) The
Company has a credit agreement with a syndicate of banks which expires February
15, 2010. Under the terms of the agreement, the syndicate provided the
Company with a $100 million credit facility. The credit agreement permits the
issuance of up to $20 million in letters of credit, the amount of which reduces
the availability of permitted borrowings under the agreement. At December 31,
2007, the Company had outstanding letters of credit aggregating
$4.4 million which is primarily comprised of letters of credit for the
Department of Education and real estate leases.
The
obligations of the Company under the credit agreement are secured by a lien on
substantially all of the assets of the Company and its subsidiaries and any
assets that it or its subsidiaries may acquire in the future, including a pledge
of substantially all of the subsidiaries’ common stock. Outstanding borrowings
bear interest at the rate of adjusted LIBOR plus 1.0% to 1.75%, as defined, or a
base rate (as defined in the credit agreement). In addition to paying interest
on outstanding principal under the credit agreement, the Company and its
subsidiaries are required to pay a commitment fee to the lender with respect to
the unused amounts available under the credit agreement at a rate equal to 0.25%
to 0.40% per year, as defined. In connection with the Company’s initial public
offering in 2005, the Company repaid the then outstanding loan balance of $31.0
million.
During
2007, the Company had incurred a total of $26.5 million under the current credit
agreement. Interest rates on the loans outstanding during the year
ranged from 6.32% to 8.25%. During the third quarter of 2007, the
Company had paid down a total of 21.5 million on the total debt incurred during
the year leaving $5.0 million outstanding under the current credit agreement as
of December 31, 2007. The interest rate on the $5.0 million is at an
interest rate of 7.25% at December 31, 2007.
The
credit agreement contains various covenants, including a number of financial
covenants. Furthermore, the credit agreement contains customary events of
default as well as an event of default in the event of the suspension or
termination of Title IV Program funding for the Company’s and its subsidiaries'
schools aggregating 10% or more of the Company’s EBITDA (as defined) or its
consolidated total assets and such suspension or termination is not cured within
a specified period. As of December 31, 2007, the Company was in compliance
with the financial covenants contained in the credit agreement.
(b) The
Company completed a sale and a leaseback of several facilities on
December 28, 2001, as discussed further in Note 17. The Company
retained a continuing involvement in the lease and as a result it is prohibited
from utilizing sale-leaseback accounting. Accordingly, the Company has treated
this transaction as a finance lease. Rent payments under this obligation for the
three years in the period ended December 31, 2007 were $1.3 million, $1.3
million and $1.3 million, respectively. These payments have been reflected in
the accompanying consolidated income statement as interest expense for all
periods presented since the effective interest rate on the obligation is greater
than the scheduled payments. The lease expiration date is January 25,
2017.
On May
22, 2006, the Company assumed a mortgage note payable as part of the acquisition
of FLA in the amount of $7.2 million. The mortgage note was payable to the bank
in monthly installments which varied due to changes in the interest rates. The
note had an interest rate which was at the bank’s LIBOR rate plus 2.0% with a
maturity date of May 1, 2023. The note was repaid in November 2006. Also see
Note 16.
As of
December 31, 2007, the Company was in compliance with the financial
covenants contained in its borrowing agreements.
Scheduled
maturities of long-term debt and lease obligations at December 31, 2007 are
as follows:
Year ending December
31,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
$ |
204 |
|
2009
|
|
|
130 |
|
2010
|
|
|
5,135 |
|
2011
|
|
|
146 |
|
2012
|
|
|
91 |
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
9,672 |
|
|
|
$ |
15,378 |
|
10.
|
SLM
FINANCIAL CORPORATION LOAN
AGREEMENT
|
The
Company entered into an agreement, effective March 28, 2005 to June 30, 2006,
with SLM Financial Corporation (SLM) to provide up to $6.0 million of private
recourse loans to qualifying students. Under the recourse loan
agreement, the Company was required to fund 30% of all loans disbursed into a
SLM reserve account. During the term of the agreement, $4.9 million
of loans were disbursed, resulting in a $1.5 million of bad debt expense.
Funding under the private recourse loan agreement was classified as bad
debt expense included in selling, general and administrative expenses in our
financial statements. For the year ended December 31, 2007, no loans
were disbursed under this program.
The
Company entered into a Tiered Discount Loan Program agreement, effective
September 1, 2007, with SLM to provide up to $16.0 million of private
non-recourse loans to qualifying students. Under this agreement, the
Company was required to pay SLM either 20% or 30% of all loans disbursed,
depending on each student borrower’s credit score. The Company was
billed at the beginning of each month based on loans disbursed during the prior
month. For the year ended December 31, 2007, $0.4 million of loans were
disbursed, resulting in a $0.1 million loss on sale of
receivables. Loss on sale of receivables is included in selling,
general and administrative expenses in the accompanying statements of
income.
In
January 2008, SLM notified the Company that it was terminating its tiered
discount loan program, effective February 18, 2008. The termination
of this agreement is expected to have a limited impact on the
Company. The loans covered under the SLM tiered discount loan program
represented approximately 4.6% of revenue on a cash basis as of December 31,
2007. The Company had previously concluded the SLM’s tiered discount
program was too expensive and had decided to finance these students through
internal funding sources.
Effective
January 1, 2002, the Company adopted the Lincoln Technical Institute
Management Stock Option Plan ("2002 Plan") for key employees, consultants and
nonemployee directors. The name of the Plan was changed to the LESC Management
Stock Option Plan in 2003. There are reserved for issue, upon exercise of
options granted under the Plan, no more than 2,087,835 shares of the authorized
common shares. The term of each option granted is ten years. The options awarded
to each key employee were evenly divided between service options, which vest
annually from the date of grant, and performance options, which vest according
to annual targets. The vesting of the options varies depending on date of hire.
For all key employees, or non-employee directors who were with the Company prior
to February 1, 2001, 20% of their service options were granted as of the
effective date with 20% vesting annually thereafter. For their performance
options, 25% will vest each year beginning April 15, 2003, subject to the
Company achieving certain financial goals. For all key employees, or
non-employee directors who were hired after February 1, 2001, 20% of their
service options vest on the anniversary of their hire date. Similarly, 20% of
their performance options will vest on each April 15 after the date of hire
subject to achieving certain financial goals and vest in full after five years.
Prior to the Company’s initial public offering in June 2005, the exercise price
of the options was the estimated fair value of the shares at the date of grant,
as determined by the board of directors. Concurrent with the Company’s initial
public offering, all performance options not yet vested were converted to
service options and vest in the same manner as described above.
On June
8, 2005, the Company adopted the Lincoln Educational Services Corporation 2005
Long-Term Incentive Plan (the “LTIP”). The LTIP permits the granting of
stock options, restricted share units, performance share units, stock
appreciation rights and other equity awards, as determined by the Company’s
compensation committee. The compensation committee has the authority,
among other things, to determine eligibility to receive awards, the type of
awards to be granted, the number of shares of stock subject to, or cash amount
payable in connection with, the awards and the terms and conditions of each
award (including vesting, forfeiture, payment, exercisability and performance
periods and targets). The maximum number of shares of our common stock that may
be issued for all purposes under the LTIP is 1,000,000 shares plus any shares of
common stock remaining available for issuance under the 2002 Plan. Any shares of
our common stock that (i) correspond to awards under the LTIP or the 2002 Plan
that are forfeited or expire for any reason without having been exercised or
settled or (ii) are tendered or withheld to pay the exercise price of an award
or to satisfy a participant’s tax withholding obligations will be added back to
the maximum number of shares available for issuance under the
LTIP.
On June
23, 2005, the Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation became
effective. The Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation increased the
number of authorized common shares from 50.0 million shares to
100.0 million shares and authorized 10.0 million shares of preferred
stock.
On June
28, 2005, the Company issued 3.0 million shares of common stock in an
initial public offering for approximately $53.1 million in net cash proceeds,
after deducting underwriting commissions and offering expenses of approximately
$6.9 million. A portion of the $53.1 million in net proceeds
received from the sale of common stock was used to repay all the outstanding
indebtedness under the credit facility discussed in Note 9, totaling
$31.0 million.
On July
18, 2005, the underwriters of the initial public offering exercised a portion of
their over-allotment option resulting in the Company’s sale on July 22, 2005 of
177,425 shares of common stock and net proceeds to the Company of $3.3
million.
Under the
Company’s LTIP, certain employees received restricted stock totaling 200,000
shares equal to $2.9 million on October 30, 2007. The number of
shares granted to each employee was based on the fair market value of a share of
common stock on that date. The restricted shares vest ratably each
year over five years from the grant date. The recognized restricted stock
expense for the year ended December 31, 2007 was $0.1 million. The deferred
compensation or unrecognized restricted stock expense under the LTIP as of
December 31, 2007 was $2.8 million.
Pursuant
to the Company’s 2005 Non-Employee Directors Restricted Stock Plan (the
“Non-Employee Directors Plan”), each of the Company’s seven non-employee
directors received an award of 3,069 restricted shares of common stock equal to
$0.06 million on July 29, 2005. On January 1, 2006, one non-employee director
resigned, forfeiting 3,069 restricted shares of common stock awarded on July 29,
2005. Two newly appointed non-employee directors each received an award of 3,625
restricted shares of common stock equal to $0.06 million on March 1, 2006.
On May 23, 2006, the date of the Company’s 2006 annual meeting, each
non-employee director received an annual restricted award of 1,781 restricted
shares of common stock equal to $0.03 million. Beginning in 2007, each
non-employee director received, on April 26, 2007, the date of the Company’s
2007 annual meeting, an annual restricted award of 2,825 restricted shares of
common stock equal to $0.04 million. The number of shares granted to
each non-employee director was based on the fair market value of a share of
common stock on that date. The restricted shares vest ratably on the
first, second and third anniversaries of the grant date; however, there is no
vesting period on the right to vote or the right to receive dividends on these
restricted shares. As of December 31, 2007, there were a total of 57,477 shares
awarded and 19,442 shares vested under the Non-Employee Directors Plan. The
recognized restricted stock expense for the year ended December 31, 2007 and
2006 was $0.3 million and $0.3 million, respectively. The deferred compensation
or unrecognized restricted stock expense under the Non-Employee Directors Plan
as of December 31, 2007 and 2006 was $0.4 million and $0.5 million,
respectively.
The fair
value of the stock options used to compute stock-based compensation is the
estimated present value at the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option
pricing model. The weighted average fair values of options granted during 2007,
2006, and 2005 were $6.78, $9.68, and $10.55, respectively, using the following
weighted average assumptions for grants:
|
|
At
December 31,
|
|
|
2007
|
|
2006
|
|
2005 |
Expected
volatility
|
|
|
55.42 |
% |
|
|
55.10 |
% |
|
|
55.10-71.35 |
% |
Expected
dividend yield
|
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
0 |
% |
Expected
life (term)
|
|
6
Years
|
|
|
6
Years
|
|
|
4-8
Years
|
|
Risk-free
interest rate
|
|
|
4.36 |
% |
|
|
4.13-4.84 |
% |
|
|
3.59-4.29 |
% |
Weighted-average
exercise price during the year
|
|
$ |
11.96 |
|
|
$ |
17.00 |
|
|
$ |
17.14 |
|
The
following is a summary of transactions pertaining to the option
plans:
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Weighted
Average
Exercise
Price
Per
Share
|
|
Weighted
Average
Remaining
Contractual
Term
|
|
Aggregate
intrinsic
Value
(in
thousands)
|
|
Outstanding
December 31, 2004
|
|
|
2,022,495 |
|
|
|
5.92 |
|
|
|
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
189,500 |
|
|
|
17.14 |
|
|
|
|
|
Cancelled
|
|
|
(102,125 |
) |
|
|
11.30 |
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(270,697 |
) |
|
|
2.65 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding
December 31, 2005
|
|
|
1,839,173 |
|
|
|
7.26 |
|
|
|
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
256,000 |
|
|
|
17.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
Cancelled
|
|
|
(103,072 |
) |
|
|
13.98 |
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(263,876 |
) |
|
|
3.56 |
|
|
|
$ |
3,444 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding
December 31, 2006
|
|
|
1,728,225 |
|
|
|
8.85 |
|
6.31
years
|
|
|
10,255 |
|
Granted
|
|
|
185,500 |
|
|
|
11.96 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cancelled
|
|
|
(181,474 |
) |
|
|
12.02 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(220,088 |
) |
|
|
3.34 |
|
|
|
|
1,811 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding
December 31, 2007
|
|
|
1,512,163 |
|
|
|
9.65 |
|
5.83
years
|
|
|
9,156 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercisable
as of December 31, 2007
|
|
|
1,066,215 |
|
|
|
7.41 |
|
4.83
years
|
|
|
8,514 |
|
As of
December 31, 2007, we estimate that unrecognized pre-tax compensation expense
for all unvested stock option awards, in the amount of approximately $1.9
million which will be expensed over the weighted-average period of approximately
1.6 years.
The
following table presents a summary of options outstanding at December 31,
2007:
|
|
|
At December
31, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
Stock
Options Outstanding
|
|
|
Stock
Options Exercisable
|
|
Range
of Exercise
Prices
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Contractual
Weighted
Average
life
(years)
|
|
|
Weighted
Average
Price
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Weighted
Exercise
Price
|
|
$ |
1.55
|
|
|
|
50,898 |
|
|
|
1.47 |
|
|
$ |
1.55 |
|
|
|
50,898 |
|
|
$ |
1.55 |
|
$ |
3.10
|
|
|
|
651,557 |
|
|
|
4.04 |
|
|
|
3.10 |
|
|
|
648,357 |
|
|
|
3.10 |
|
$ |
4.00-$13.99
|
|
|
|
201,500 |
|
|
|
8.67 |
|
|
|
11.11 |
|
|
|
17,400 |
|
|
|
5.29 |
|
$ |
14.00-$19.99
|
|
|
|
480,708 |
|
|
|
7.29 |
|
|
|
15.34 |
|
|
|
281,660 |
|
|
|
14.78 |
|
$ |
20.00-$25.00
|
|
|
|
127,500 |
|
|
|
6.68 |
|
|
|
22.66 |
|
|
|
67,900 |
|
|
|
22.99 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,512,163 |
|
|
|
5.83 |
|
|
|
9.65 |
|
|
|
1,066,215 |
|
|
|
7.41 |
|
The
Company sponsors a noncontributory defined benefit pension plan covering
substantially all of the Company's union employees. Benefits are provided based
on employees' years of service and earnings. This plan was frozen on
December 31, 1994 for nonunion employees.
The
following table sets forth the plan's funded status and amounts recognized in
the consolidated financial statements:
|
|
Year
Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
CHANGES
IN BENEFIT OBLIGATIONS:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefit
obligation-beginning of year
|
|
$ |
14,624 |
|
|
$ |
13,961 |
|
Service
cost
|
|
|
115 |
|
|
|
110 |
|
Interest
cost
|
|
|
831 |
|
|
|
797 |
|
Actuarial
(gain) loss
|
|
|
(965 |
) |
|
|
218 |
|
Benefits
paid
|
|
|
(543 |
) |
|
|
(462 |
) |
Benefit
obligation at end of year
|
|
|
14,062 |
|
|
|
14,624 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CHANGE
IN PLAN ASSETS:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair
value of plan assets-beginning of year
|
|
|
15,731 |
|
|
|
14,330 |
|
Actual
return on plan assets
|
|
|
570 |
|
|
|
1,663 |
|
Employer
contribution
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
200 |
|
Benefits
paid
|
|
|
(543 |
) |
|
|
(462 |
) |
Fair
value of plan assets-end of year
|
|
|
15,758 |
|
|
|
15,731 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAIR
VALUE IN EXCESS OF BENEFIT OBLIGATION FUNDED STATUS:
|
|
$ |
1,696 |
|
|
$ |
1,107 |
|
Amounts
recognized in the consolidated balance sheets consist of:
|
|
At
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
Noncurrent
assets
|
|
$ |
1,696 |
|
|
$ |
1,107 |
|
Amounts
recognized in accumulated other comprehensive loss consist of:
|
|
Year
Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
Loss
|
|
$ |
(3,537 |
) |
|
$ |
(4,062 |
) |
Deferred
income taxes
|
|
|
1,451 |
|
|
|
1,651 |
|
Accumulated
other comprehensive loss
|
|
$ |
(2,086 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,411 |
) |
The
accumulated benefit obligation was $13.9 million and $14.5 million at December
31, 2007 and 2006, respectively.
The
following table provides the components of net periodic benefit cost for the
plan:
|
|
Year
Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
COMPONENTS
OF NET PERIODIC BENEFIT COST (INCOME)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Service
cost
|
|
$ |
115 |
|
|
$ |
110 |
|
Interest
cost
|
|
|
831 |
|
|
|
797 |
|
Expected
return on plan assets
|
|
|
(1,233 |
) |
|
|
(1,122 |
) |
Amortization
of transition asset
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Amortization
of prior service cost
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Recognized
net actuarial loss
|
|
|
223 |
|
|
|
316 |
|
Net
periodic benefit cost (income)
|
|
$ |
(64 |
) |
|
$ |
102 |
|
The
estimated net loss, transition obligation and prior service cost for the plan
that will be amortized from accumulated other comprehensive income into net
periodic benefit cost over the next year are ($0.2) million, $0 million and $0
million.
Fair
value of total plan assets by major asset category as of December
31:
|
|
2007
|
|
2006
|
Equity
securities
|
|
|
49 |
% |
|
|
49 |
% |
Fixed
income
|
|
|
37 |
% |
|
|
36 |
% |
International
equities
|
|
|
14 |
% |
|
|
14 |
% |
Cash
and equivalents
|
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
1 |
% |
Total
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
% |
Weighted-average
assumptions used to determine benefit obligations as of
December 31:
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
Discount
rate
|
|
|
6.37 |
% |
|
|
5.82 |
% |
Rate
of compensation increase
|
|
|
4.00 |
% |
|
|
4.00 |
% |
Weighted-average
assumptions used to determine net periodic pension cost for years ended
December 31:
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
Discount
rate
|
|
|
5.82 |
% |
|
|
5.75 |
% |
|
|
5.75 |
% |
Rate
of compensation increase
|
|
|
4.00 |
% |
|
|
4.00 |
% |
|
|
4.00 |
% |
Long-term
rate of return
|
|
|
8.00 |
% |
|
|
8.00 |
% |
|
|
8.00 |
% |
As this
plan was frozen to non-union employees on December 31, 1994, the difference
between the benefit obligation and accumulated benefit obligation is not
significant in any year.
The
Company invests plan assets based on a total return on investment approach,
pursuant to which the plan assets include a diversified blend of equity and
fixed income investments toward a goal of maximizing the long-term rate of
return without assuming an unreasonable level of investment risk. The Company
determines the level of risk based on an analysis of plan liabilities, the
extent to which the value of the plan assets satisfies the plan liabilities and
the plan's financial condition. The investment policy includes target
allocations ranging from 30% to 70% for equity investments, 20% to 60% for fixed
income investments and 0% to 10% for cash equivalents. The equity portion of the
plan assets represents growth and value stocks of small, medium and large
companies. The Company measures and monitors the investment risk of the plan
assets both on a quarterly basis and annually when the Company assesses plan
liabilities.
The
Company uses a building block approach to estimate the long-term rate of return
on plan assets. This approach is based on the capital markets assumption that
the greater the volatility, the greater the return over the long term. An
analysis of the historical performance of equity and fixed income investments,
together with current market factors such as the inflation and interest rates,
are used to help make the assumptions necessary to estimate a long-term rate of
return on plan assets. Once this estimate is made, the Company reviews the
portfolio of plan assets and makes adjustments thereto that the Company believes
are necessary to reflect a diversified blend of equity and fixed income
investments that is capable of achieving the estimated long-term rate of return
without assuming an unreasonable level of investment risk. The Company also
compares the portfolio of plan assets to those of other pension plans to help
assess the suitability and appropriateness of the plan's
investments.
While the
Company does not expect to make any contributions to the plan in 2008, after
considering the funded status of the plan, movements in the discount rate,
investment performance and related tax consequences, the Company may choose to
make contributions to the plan in any given year.
The total
amount of the Company’s contributions paid under its pension plan was $0 and
$0.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively. The
net periodic benefit income was $64,000 for the year ended December 31, 2007.
The net periodic benefit expense was $102,000 for the year ended December 31,
2006.
Information
about the expected benefit payments for the plan is as follows:
Year
Ending December 31,
|
|
2008
|
|
$ |
657 |
|
2009
|
|
|
690 |
|
2010
|
|
|
754 |
|
2011
|
|
|
786 |
|
2012
|
|
|
838 |
|
Years
2013-2017
|
|
|
5,388 |
|
The
Company has a 401(k) defined contribution plan for all eligible employees.
Employees may contribute up to 15% of their compensation into the plan. The
Company will contribute an additional 30% of the employee's contributed amount
on the first 6% of compensation. For the years ended December 31, 2007,
2006 and 2005 the Company's expense for the 401(k) plan amounted to
$1.2 million, $0.9 million and $0.9 million,
respectively.
Components
of the provision for income taxes from continuing operations were as
follows:
|
|
Year
Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
Current:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal
|
|
$ |
8,538 |
|
|
$ |
12,585 |
|
|
$ |
9,943 |
|
State
|
|
|
2,484 |
|
|
|
3,162 |
|
|
|
2,648 |
|
Total
|
|
|
11,022 |
|
|
|
15,747 |
|
|
|
12,591 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal
|
|
|
(776 |
) |
|
|
(2,908 |
) |
|
|
75 |
|
State
|
|
|
(314 |
) |
|
|
(747 |
) |
|
|
265 |
|
Total
|
|
|
(1,090 |
) |
|
|
(3,655 |
) |
|
|
340 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
provision
|
|
$ |
9,932 |
|
|
$ |
12,092 |
|
|
$ |
12,931 |
|
The
components of the deferred tax assets are as follows:
|
|
At
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
Deferred
tax assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued
vacation
|
|
$ |
102 |
|
|
$ |
94 |
|
Allowance
for bad debts
|
|
|
4,662 |
|
|
|
4,683 |
|
Accrued
student fees
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
50 |
|
Total
current deferred tax assets
|
|
|
4,764 |
|
|
|
4,827 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred
tax liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued
student fees
|
|
|
(189 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Total
current deferred tax liabilities
|
|
|
(189 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Total
net current deferred tax assets
|
|
|
4,575 |
|
|
|
4,827 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noncurrent:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued
rent
|
|
|
2,455 |
|
|
|
2,177 |
|
Stock-based
compensation
|
|
|
2,048 |
|
|
|
1,568 |
|
Depreciation
|
|
|
7,554 |
|
|
|
5,369 |
|
Sale
leaseback-deferred gain
|
|
|
2,025 |
|
|
|
1,889 |
|
Total
noncurrent deferred tax assets
|
|
|
14,082 |
|
|
|
11,003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred
tax liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noncurrent:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
intangibles
|
|
|
(2,294 |
) |
|
|
(3,177 |
) |
Goodwill
|
|
|
(5,592 |
) |
|
|
(4,687 |
) |
Prepaid
pension cost
|
|
|
(696 |
) |
|
|
(451 |
) |
Total
deferred tax liabilities
|
|
|
(8,582 |
) |
|
|
(8,315 |
) |
Total
net noncurrent deferred tax assets
|
|
|
5,500 |
|
|
|
2,688 |
|
Total
net deferred tax assets
|
|
$ |
10,075 |
|
|
$ |
7,515 |
|
At
December 31, 2005, the Company had $0.8 million of state net operating loss
carry-forwards, which were used in 2006.
The
difference between the actual tax provision (benefit) and the tax provision
(benefit) that would result from the use of the Federal statutory rate is as
follows:
|
|
Year
Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
Income
from continuing operations before taxes
|
|
$ |
23,759 |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
29,176 |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
33,215 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expected
tax
|
|
$ |
8,316 |
|
|
|
35.0 |
% |
|
$ |
10,212 |
|
|
|
35.0 |
% |
|
$ |
11,625 |
|
|
|
35.0 |
% |
State
tax expense (net of federal benefit)
|
|
|
1,411 |
|
|
|
6.0 |
|
|
|
1,570 |
|
|
|
5.4 |
|
|
|
1,893 |
|
|
|
5.7 |
|
Resolution
of tax contingency (a)
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(785 |
) |
|
|
(2.4 |
) |
Other
|
|
|
205 |
|
|
|
0.8 |
|
|
|
310 |
|
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
|
198 |
|
|
|
0.6 |
|
Total
|
|
$ |
9,932 |
|
|
|
41.8 |
% |
|
$ |
12,092 |
|
|
|
41.4 |
% |
|
$ |
12,931 |
|
|
|
38.9 |
% |
(a) For
the year ended December 31, 2005, the Company recognized a benefit of
approximately $0.8 million resulting from the resolution of a tax
contingency.
On
January 1, 2007, the Company adopted the provision of Financial Standards
Accounting Board Interpretation No. 48 Accounting for Uncertainty in Income
Taxes (“FIN 48”) an interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109. The
adoption of FIN 48 did not have a significant impact on the Company’s financial
position. The Company recognizes potential interest and penalties
related to unrecognized tax benefits in income tax expense. The amount of
unrecognized tax benefit was $0.1 million as of January 1, 2007 and December 31,
2007. Included in this balance were positions that, if recognized, would affect
the effective tax rate by $0.1 million as of January 1, 2007 and December 31,
2007.
A
reconciliation of the beginning and ending amount of unrecognized tax benefits
is as follows:
Unrecognized
tax benefits balance at January 1, 2007
|
|
$ |
100 |
|
Gross
increases for tax positions of prior years
|
|
|
- |
|
Gross
decreases for tax positions of prior years
|
|
|
- |
|
Gross
increase in current period tax positions
|
|
|
- |
|
Settlements
|
|
|
- |
|
Lapse
of statue of limitations
|
|
|
- |
|
Unrecognized
tax benefits balance at December 31, 2007
|
|
$ |
100 |
|
The
Company or one of its subsidiaries files income tax returns in the U.S. federal
jurisdiction, and various states and foreign jurisdictions. The
Company is no longer subject to U.S. federal income tax examinations for years
before 2004 and generally, is no longer subject to state and local income tax
examinations by tax authorities for years before 2003.
Due to
the nature and status of the positions taken, management has determined that it
is not reasonably possible that the unrecognized tax benefit will significantly
increase or decrease during the 12 months ended 31 December 2008.
14. SEGMENT REPORTING
The
Company's principal business is providing post-secondary education. Accordingly,
the Company's operations aggregate into one reporting segment.
15.
|
RELATED PARTY
TRANSACTIONS
|
On
October 15, 2007, the Company entered into a Separation and Release Agreement
with Lawrence E. Brown, our former Vice Chairman. Under this
agreement Mr. Brown’s employment terminated as of the close of business on
October 31, 2007. For a period of 14 months following the date of
separation of employment, Mr. Brown may continue to provide transitional
services to us, not to exceed ten hours per month. In consideration
for a release of claims, the Company paid Mr. Brown a lump sum cash payment of
$0.5 million, subject to withholding, and will reimburse Mr. Brown for the
employer-portion of the premiums due for continuation of coverage under COBRA
for a maximum period ending on December 31, 2008. Mr. Brown is
entitled to the use of his automobile and reimbursement of associated costs by
us through December 31, 2008. In addition, pursuant to the terms of
the agreement, Mr. Brown agreed to be subject to certain restrictive covenants,
which, among other things, prohibit him for the duration of 14 months following
the date of separation of employment, without our prior written consent, from
(i) competing against the Company and (ii) soliciting the Company or any of our
affiliates’ or subsidiaries’ employees, consultants, clients or
customers.
Pursuant
to the Employment Agreement between Shaun E. McAlmont and the Company, the
Company agreed to pay and reimburse Mr. McAlmont the reasonable costs of his
relocation from Denver, Colorado to West Orange, New Jersey in the year ended
December 31, 2006. Such relocation assistance included the purchase by the
Company of Mr. McAlmont’s home in Denver, Colorado. The $0.5 million price paid
for Mr. McAlmont’s home equaled the average of the amount of two independent
appraisers selected by the Company. This amount is reflected in property,
equipment and facilities in the accompanying consolidated balance
sheets.
The
Company had a consulting agreement with Hart Capital LLC, which terminated by
its terms in June 2004, to advise the Company in identifying acquisition and
merger targets and assisting with the due diligence reviews of and negotiations
with these targets. Hart Capital is the managing member of Five Mile River
Capital Partners LLC, which is the second largest stockholder of the
Company. Steven Hart, the President of Hart Capital, is a member of the
Company’s board of directors. In accordance with the agreement, the
Company paid Hart Capital approximately $0, and $0.4 million for the years ended
December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively. In connection with the
consummation of the NETI acquisition, which closed on January 11, 2005, the
Company paid Hart Capital $0.3 million for its services.
In 2003,
the Company entered into a management service agreement with its major
stockholder. In accordance with this agreement the Company paid Stonington
Partners a management fee of $0.75 million per year for management consulting
and financial and business advisory services for each of the years in
2005. Such services included valuing acquisitions and structuring their
financing and assisting with new loan agreements. This agreement
terminated by its terms upon the Company’s completion of its initial public
offering in 2005.
16.
|
DERIVATIVE INSTRUMENTS
AND HEDGING
ACTIVITIES
|
On May
22, 2006, the Company assumed a mortgage note payable (See Note 9) with an
accompanying interest rate swap (the “SWAP”) as part of the acquisition of the
New England Institute of Technology at Palm Beach, Inc. in the amount of $7.2
million. The Company accounted for the interest rate swap agreement in
accordance with SFAS No. 133, Accounting for Derivative
Instruments and Hedging Activities, as amended. Under the swap
agreement, the Company paid a fixed rate tied to the one month LIBOR rate until
May 1, 2013 and received a variable rate of 6.48%. The SWAP was accounted
for as an ineffective hedge as it did not meet the requirements set forth under
SFAS No. 133. Accordingly, other income (loss) includes a loss of
$0.2 million as of December 31, 2006. The Company repaid the mortgage
note in November 2006. As a result the SWAP agreement was terminated in 2006 and
the Company received $0.2 million for the fair market value.
17. COMMITMENTS AND
CONTINGENCIES
Lease
Commitments—The Company leases office premises, educational facilities
and various equipment for varying periods through the year 2020 at basic annual
rentals (excluding taxes, insurance, and other expenses under certain leases) as
follows:
Year
Ending December 31,
|
|
Finance
Obligations
|
|
|
Operating
Leases
|
|
|
Capital
Leases
|
|
2008
|
|
$ |
1,381 |
|
|
$ |
16,398 |
|
|
$ |
256 |
|
2009
|
|
|
1,381 |
|
|
|
15,245 |
|
|
|
167 |
|
2010
|
|
|
1,381 |
|
|
|
13,135 |
|
|
|
161 |
|
2011
|
|
|
1,381 |
|
|
|
12,401 |
|
|
|
161 |
|
2012
|
|
|
1,381 |
|
|
|
11,984 |
|
|
|
93 |
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
5,641 |
|
|
|
64,270 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
12,546 |
|
|
|
133,433 |
|
|
|
838 |
|
Less
amount representing interest
|
|
|
(12,546 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(133 |
) |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
133,433 |
|
|
$ |
705 |
|
On
December 28, 2001, the Company completed a sale and a leaseback of four
owned facilities to a third party for net proceeds of approximately
$8.8 million. The initial term of the lease is 15 years with two
ten-year extensions. The lease is an operating lease that starts at
$1.2 million in the first year and increases annually by the consumer price
index. The lease includes an option near the end of the initial lease term to
purchase the facilities at fair value, as defined. This transaction is being
accounted for as a lease obligation. The net proceeds received have been
reflected in the consolidated balance sheet as a finance obligation. The lease
payments are included as a component of interest expense.
Rent
expense, included in operating expenses in the accompanying financial statements
for the three years ended December 31, 2007 is $16.7 million,
$15.7 million, and $15.1 million, respectively. Interest expense
related to the financing obligation in the accompanying financial statements for
the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005 is $1.3 million, $1.3
million and $1.3 million, respectively.
Capital
Expenditures—The Company has entered into commitments to expand or
renovate campuses. These commitments are in the range of $3.0 to $5.0 million in
the aggregate and are due within the next 12 months.
Litigation and
Regulatory Matters—In the ordinary conduct of our business, we are
subject to periodic lawsuits, investigations and claims, including, but not
limited to, claims involving students or graduates and routine employment
matters. Although we cannot predict with certainty the ultimate resolution of
lawsuits, investigations and claims asserted against us, we do not believe that
any currently pending legal proceeding to which we are a party will have a
material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of
operation or cash flows.
Student
Loans—At December 31, 2007, the Company had committed to fund
approximately $15.5 million in student financing.
Vendor
Relationship—On April 1, 2006, the Company entered into an agreement with
Snap-on Industrial which expires on March 31, 2011. The Company has
agreed to grant Snap-on exclusive rights to our certain automotive campuses to
display advertising and to train our students with the exception of one
pre-existing vendor contract. The Company earns credits that
are redeemable for tools and equipment based on the number of automotive
graduates quarterly. In addition, credits are earned on our purchases as well as
purchases made by students enrolled in our automotive programs. Snap-on receivable for
credits not redeemed for the years ended December 31, 2007 and
2006 was $0.5 million and $0.3 million, respectively.
In
October 1, 2005, the Company entered into an agreement with Snap-on exclusively
for our Queens, NY campus opened March 27, 2006 which expires on November 30,
2011. We have agreed to grant Snap-on exclusive rights to in school advertising
and supplying all student training tools and equipment, as well as our
automotive equipment purchases. In exchange, Snap-on agrees to
advance tools and equipment needed to build out the school, not to exceed $1.0
million at list price. The equipment advance is offset by
credits earned through purchases by the Queens campus and their
students. Snap-on liability resulting from advanced equipment
received in excess of credits earned for the years ended December 31, 2007 and
2006, was $0.6 million and $0.6 million,
respectively.
Executive
Employment Agreements—The Company entered into employment contracts with
key executives that provide for continued salary payments if the executives are
terminated for reasons other than cause, as defined in the agreements. The
future employment contract commitments for such employees were approximately
$2.8 million at December 31, 2007.
Change in Control
Agreements—In the event of a change of control several key executives
will receive continue salary payments based on their employment
agreements.
Surety
Bonds—Each of our campuses must be authorized by the applicable state
education agency in which the campus is located to operate and to grant degrees,
diplomas or certificates to its students. The campuses are subject to extensive,
ongoing regulation by each of these states. In addition, our campuses are
required to be authorized by the applicable state education agencies of certain
other states in which our campuses recruit students. The Company is required to
post surety bonds on behalf of our campuses and education representatives with
multiple states to maintain authorization to conduct our business. At December
31, 2007, we have posted surety bonds in the total amount of approximately
$14.0 million.
18. UNAUDITED QUARTERLY FINANCIAL
INFORMATION
Quarterly
financial information for 2007 and 2006 is as follows (in thousands except per
share data):
|
|
Quarter
|
|
2007
|
|
First
|
|
|
Second
|
|
|
Third
|
|
|
Fourth
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$ |
76,170 |
|
|
$ |
74,744 |
|
|
$ |
86,566 |
|
|
$ |
90,294 |
|
Operating
(loss) income
|
|
|
(1,164 |
) |
|
|
1,966 |
|
|
|
8,079 |
|
|
|
17,013 |
|
(Loss)
income from continuing operations
|
|
|
(930 |
) |
|
|
768 |
|
|
|
4,370 |
|
|
|
9,620 |
|
Loss
from discontinued operations
|
|
|
(688 |
) |
|
|
(2,468 |
) |
|
|
(2,331 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Net
(loss) income
|
|
|
(1,618 |
) |
|
|
(1,700 |
) |
|
|
2,039 |
|
|
|
9,620 |
|
(Loss)
income per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss)
earnings per share from continuing operations
|
|
$ |
(0.04 |
) |
|
$ |
0.03 |
|
|
$ |
0.17 |
|
|
$ |
0.38 |
|
Loss
per share from discontinued operations
|
|
|
(0.02 |
) |
|
|
(0.10 |
) |
|
|
(0.09 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Net
(loss) income per share
|
|
$ |
(0.06 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.07 |
) |
|
$ |
0.08 |
|
|
$ |
0.38 |
|
Diluted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss)
earnings per share from continuing operations
|
|
$ |
(0.04 |
) |
|
$ |
0.03 |
|
|
$ |
0.17 |
|
|
$ |
0.37 |
|
Loss
per share from discontinued operations
|
|
|
(0.02 |
) |
|
|
(0.10 |
) |
|
|
(0.09 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Net
(loss) income per share
|
|
$ |
(0.06 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.07 |
) |
|
$ |
0.08 |
|
|
$ |
0.37 |
|
|
|
Quarter
|
|
2006
|
|
First
|
|
|
Second
|
|
|
Third
|
|
|
Fourth
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$ |
72,612 |
|
|
$ |
72,647 |
|
|
$ |
81,911 |
|
|
$ |
83,460 |
|
Operating
income
|
|
|
5,299 |
|
|
|
2,523 |
|
|
|
5,580 |
|
|
|
17,219 |
|
Income
from continuing operations
|
|
|
3,108 |
|
|
|
1,406 |
|
|
|
2,788 |
|
|
|
9,799 |
|
Loss
from discontinued operations
|
|
|
(346 |
) |
|
|
(440 |
) |
|
|
(556 |
) |
|
|
(207 |
) |
Net
income
|
|
|
2,762 |
|
|
|
966 |
|
|
|
2,232 |
|
|
|
9,592 |
|
Income
per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings
per share from continuing operations
|
|
$ |
0.12 |
|
|
$ |
0.06 |
|
|
$ |
0.11 |
|
|
$ |
0.39 |
|
Loss
per share from discontinued operations
|
|
|
(0.01 |
) |
|
|
(0.02 |
) |
|
|
(0.02 |
) |
|
|
(0.01 |
) |
Net
income (loss) per share
|
|
$ |
0.11 |
|
|
$ |
0.04 |
|
|
$ |
0.09 |
|
|
$ |
0.38 |
|
Diluted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings
per share from continuing operations
|
|
$ |
0.12 |
|
|
$ |
0.05 |
|
|
$ |
0.11 |
|
|
$ |
0.38 |
|
Loss
per share from discontinued operations
|
|
|
(0.01 |
) |
|
|
(0.01 |
) |
|
|
(0.02 |
) |
|
|
(0.01 |
) |
Net
income per share
|
|
$ |
0.11 |
|
|
$ |
0.04 |
|
|
$ |
0.09 |
|
|
$ |
0.37 |
|
19.
|
DISCONTINUED
OPERATIONS
|
On July
31, 2007 the Company’s Board of Directors approved a plan to cease operations at
the Company’s Plymouth Meeting, Pennsylvania, Norcross, Georgia and Henderson,
Nevada campuses. As a result of the above decision, the Company
reviewed the related goodwill and long-lived assets for possible impairment in
accordance with SFAS No. 142, “Goodwill and Other Intangible
Assets,” and SFAS No. 144, “Accounting for the Impairment or
Disposal of Long-Lived Assets.”
As of
September 30, 2007, all operations had ceased at these campuses and,
accordingly, the results of operations of these campuses have been reflected in
the accompanying statements of operations as “Discontinued Operations” for all
periods presented.
The
results of operations at these three campuses for each of the three year period
ended December 31, 2007 were comprised of the following (in
thousands):
|
|
Year
Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
Revenue
|
|
$ |
4,230 |
|
|
$ |
10,876 |
|
|
$ |
11,853 |
|
Operating
expenses
|
|
|
(13,760 |
) |
|
|
(13,493 |
) |
|
|
(14,432 |
) |
|
|
|
(9,530 |
) |
|
|
(2,617 |
) |
|
|
(2,579 |
) |
Benefit
for income taxes
|
|
|
(4,043 |
) |
|
|
(1,085 |
) |
|
|
(1,004 |
) |
Loss
from discontinued operations
|
|
$ |
(5,487 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,532 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,575 |
) |
LINCOLN
EDUCATIONAL SERVICES CORPORATION
Schedule II—Valuation
and Qualifying Accounts
(in
thousands)
Description
|
|
Balance
at Beginning of Period
|
|
|
Charged
to Expense
|
|
|
Accounts Written- off
|
|
|
Balance
at End of Period
|
|
Allowance
accounts for the year ended:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December
31, 2007 Student receivable allowance
|
|
$ |
11,536 |
|
|
$ |
17,767 |
|
|
$ |
(17,900 |
) |
|
$ |
11,403 |
|
December
31, 2006 Student receivable allowance
|
|
$ |
7,647 |
|
|
$ |
15,590 |
|
|
$ |
(11,701 |
) |
|
$ |
11,536 |
|
December
31, 2005 Student receivable allowance
|
|
$ |
7,023 |
|
|
$ |
11,188 |
|
|
$ |
(10,564 |
) |
|
$ |
7,647 |
|
F-29
ex10_12.htm
Exhibit
10.12
[Standard Form of Stock Option Agreement]
LINCOLN
EDUCATIONAL SERVICES CORPORATION
2005
LONG-TERM INCENTIVE PLAN
STOCK
OPTION AGREEMENT
Lincoln
Educational Services Corporation (the “Company”) hereby
grants you, _______________________ (the “Optionee”), an option
(the “Option”)
under the Company’s 2005 Long-Term Incentive Plan (the “Plan”) to purchase
Ordinary Shares (“Shares”) of the
Company. Subject to the provisions of the Plan and the Option Rules
attached hereto as Exhibit A, the principal features of the Option are as
follows:
Date
of Grant
|
|
Exercise
Price per Share
|
$______________ |
Number
of Optioned Shares
|
_______________ |
Type
of Option:
|
___Incentive
Stock Option (ISO) (to the extent permitted by applicable
laws)
|
|
___Nonstatutory
Stock Option (NSO)
|
Expiration
Date:
|
10
years from the Date of
Grant
|
Vesting
Schedule
The
Option shall become exercisable, in whole or in part, in accordance with the
terms of the Plan, the Option Rules (attached hereto as Exhibit A) and the
following vesting schedule:
The
Option shares shall vest on [ ____ ], subject to your continuing to be an
employee or consultant (a “Service Provider”)
through these dates.
Option
Termination:
Event Triggering
Option Termination
|
Maximum Time to
Exercise After Triggering Event*
|
|
|
Termination
of Service, other than for Cause (except as provided
below)
|
30
days
|
Termination
of Service for Cause
|
Immediately
|
Termination
of Service due to Disability
|
6
months
|
Termination
of Service due to death
|
6
months
|
Resignation
|
Immediately
|
*However,
in no event may the Option be exercised after the Expiration
Date. It is your
responsibility to exercise the Option, if you so desire, before it expires or
terminates.
Your
signature below indicates your agreement, understanding, and acceptance that the
Option is subject to all of the terms and conditions contained in Exhibit A and
the Plan. Please be
sure to read all of Exhibit A, which contains the specific terms and conditions
of the Option.
This
Option Agreement does not represent a securities interest in the Company, which
interest may accrue only upon the exercise of the Option in accordance with its
terms.
LINCOLN
EDUCATIONAL SERVICES CORPORATION
|
OPTIONEE
|
|
|
|
|
[Title]
|
|
Signed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date
|
|
Date
|
|
EXHIBIT
A
OPTION
RULES
1.
Grant of
Option. The Committee hereby grants to the Optionee under the
Plan the right to purchase the number of Shares set forth on the first page of
this Option Agreement (the “Grant Notice”), at the Exercise Price per Share set
forth in the Grant Notice, and subject to all of the terms and conditions in
this Option Agreement and the Plan, a copy of which the Optionee acknowledges
having received.
The
aggregate Fair Market Value (determined with respect to each Incentive Stock
Option at the time the Incentive Stock Option is granted) of Shares with respect
to which Incentive Stock Options are exercisable for the first time by the
Optionee during any calendar year (under the Plan or any other plan of the
Company) shall not exceed US$100,000. If the Option is designated in
the Grant Notice as an Incentive Stock Option, all or a portion of the Option
may nonetheless be treated as a Nonstatutory Stock Option.
2.
Definitions.
Unless otherwise defined herein, the capitalized terms in this Option Agreement
shall have the meanings ascribed to those terms in the Plan. In the
event of a conflict between the terms and conditions of the Plan and this Option
Agreement, the terms and conditions of the Plan shall prevail unless otherwise
indicated.
“Cause” shall mean (unless otherwise
defined in an agreement between the Service Provider and the Company or any of
its subsidiaries, in which case the term “Cause” as used herein with
respect to such Service Provider shall have the meaning ascribed to it therein),
(i) the Service Provider’s willful failure to perform the duties of his or her
employment or consultancy in any material respect, (ii) malfeasance or gross
negligence in the performance of a Service Provider’s duties of employment or
consultancy, (iii) the Service Provider’s conviction of a felony under the laws
of the United States or any state thereof (whether or not in connection with his
or her employment or consultancy), (iv) the Service Provider’s intentional or
reckless disclosure of trade secrets or confidential or proprietary information
respecting the Company’s or any of its subsidiaries’ business to any individual
or entity which is not in the performance of the duties of his or her employment
or consultancy, (v) the Service Provider’s commission of an act or acts of
sexual harassment that would normally constitute grounds for termination, or
(vi) any other act or omission by the Service Provider (other than an act or
omission resulting from the exercise by the Service Provider of good faith
business judgment), which is materially injurious to the financial condition or
business reputation of the Company or any of its affiliates; provided, however, that in the
case of (i) and (ii) above, a Service Provider shall not be deemed to have been
terminated for cause unless he has received written notice of the alleged basis
therefor from the Company, and fails to remedy the matter within thirty (30)
days after he has received such notice, except that no such “cure opportunity”
shall be required in the case of two separate episodes giving the Company, the
right to terminate for cause for such reason occurring within any 12-month
period.
3.
Exercise of
Option.
(a) Right to
Exercise. The
Option shall be exercisable during its term cumulatively according to the
Vesting Schedule set out in the Grant Notice and with the applicable provisions
of the Plan. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Option shall not be
exercised for a fraction of a Share.
(b) Method of
Exercise. The Option shall be exercisable to the extent then
vested by delivery of a written exercise notice in the form attached hereto as
Exhibit B (the
“Exercise
Notice”), which shall state the election to exercise the Option, the
number of Shares with respect to which the Option is being exercised, and such
other representations and agreements as may be required by the
Company. The Exercise Notice shall be signed by the Optionee (or by
the Optionee’s beneficiary or other person entitled to exercise the Option in
the event of the Optionee’s death under the Plan) and shall be delivered in
person or by certified mail to the Secretary of the Company. The
Exercise Notice shall be accompanied by payment of the aggregate Exercise Price
as to all Shares exercised. The Option shall be deemed to be
exercised as of the date (the “Exercise Date”)
(i) the Company receives (as determined by the Committee in its sole, but
reasonable, discretion) the fully executed Exercise Notice accompanied by
payment of the aggregate Exercise Price and (ii) all other applicable terms
and conditions of the Option Agreement are satisfied.
(c) Issuance of
Shares. After receiving the Exercise Notice, the Company shall
cause to be issued a certificate or certificates for the Shares as to which the
Option has been exercised, registered in the name of the person exercising this
Option (or in the names of such person and his or her spouse as community
property or as joint tenants with right of survivorship). The Company
shall cause the certificate or certificates to be deposited with the Company’s
designated stock option provider for the account of the Optionee.
4. Method of
Payment. Payment of the aggregate Exercise Price shall be by
any of the following forms of consideration, or a combination thereof, at the
election of the Optionee:
(a) cash
or check;
(b) at
the discretion of the Committee and if the Shares are publicly traded,
consideration received by the Company under a formal cashless exercise program
adopted by the Company in connection with the Plan; or
(c) at
the discretion of the Committee, surrender of other Shares which, if accepted by
the Company, would not subject the Company to adverse accounting as determined
by the Committee.
5. Non-Transferability of
Option. The Option and the rights and privileges conferred
hereby shall not be sold, pledged or otherwise transferred (whether by operation
of law or otherwise) in any manner otherwise than by will or by the laws of
descent or distribution, shall not be subject to sale under execution,
attachment, levy or similar process and may be exercised during the lifetime of
the Optionee only by the Optionee. The terms of the Plan and the
Option Agreement shall be binding upon the executors, Committees, heirs,
successors and assigns of the Optionee.
6. Term of
Option. The Option shall in any event expire on the expiration
date set forth in the Grant Notice, and may be exercised prior to the expiration
date only in accordance with the Plan and the terms of this Option
Agreement.
7. Tax
Obligations.
(a) Withholding
Taxes. The Optionee shall make appropriate arrangements with
the Company (or Subsidiary employing or retaining the Optionee) for the
satisfaction of all U.S. Federal, state, local and non-U.S. income and
employment tax withholding requirements applicable to the Option
exercise. The Optionee hereby acknowledges, understands and agrees
that the Company may refuse to honor the exercise and refuse to deliver Shares
if the withholding amounts are not delivered at the time of
exercise.
(b) Notice of Disqualifying
Disposition of Shares. If the Option granted to the Optionee
herein is designated as an Incentive Stock Option, and if the Optionee sells or
otherwise disposes of any of the Shares acquired pursuant to the Incentive Stock
Option on or before the later of (1) the date two years after the Date of Grant
and (2) the date one year after the date of exercise, the Optionee shall
immediately notify the Company in writing of such disposition. The
Optionee hereby acknowledges and agrees that the Optionee may be subject to
income tax withholding by the Company on the compensation income recognized by
the Optionee in connection with the exercise of the Option.
8.
Adjustment of
Shares. In the event of any transaction described in Section
13(b) of the Plan, the terms of the Option (including, without limitation, the
number and kind of the Optioned Shares and the Exercise Price) may be adjusted
as set forth in Section 13(b) of the Plan. This Option Agreement
shall in no way affect the right of the Company to adjust, reclassify,
reorganize or otherwise change its capital or business structure or to merge,
consolidate, dissolve, liquidate or sell or transfer any part of its business or
assets.
9.
Legality of Initial
Issuance. No Shares shall be issued upon the exercise of the
Option unless and until the Company has determined that: (i) the Company and the
Optionee have taken all actions required to register the Shares under the
Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”) or to perfect an
exemption from the registration requirements thereof, if applicable; (ii) all
applicable listing requirements of any stock exchange or other securities market
on which the Shares are listed have been satisfied; and (iii) all other
applicable provisions of state or U.S. federal law or other applicable laws have
been satisfied.
10. Securities Law
Restrictions. Regardless of whether the offering and sale of
Shares under the Plan have been registered under the Securities Act or have been
registered or qualified under the securities laws of any state, the Company at
its discretion may impose restrictions upon the sale, pledge or other transfer
of the Shares (including the placement of appropriate legends on share
certificates or the imposition of stop-transfer instructions) if, in the
judgment of the Company, such restrictions are necessary or desirable in order
to achieve compliance with the Securities Act, the securities laws of any state
or any other applicable laws.
11. General
Provisions.
(a) Notice. Any
notice required by the terms of this Option Agreement shall be given in writing
and shall be deemed effective upon personal delivery or upon deposit with the
United States Postal Service, by registered or certified mail, with postage and
fees prepaid. Notice shall be addressed to the Company at its
principal executive office and to the Optionee at the address that he or she
most recently provided to the Company.
(b) Successors and
Assigns. Except as provided herein to the contrary, this
Option Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties
to this Option Agreement, their respective successors and permitted
assigns.
(c) No
Assignment. Except as otherwise provided in this Option
Agreement, the Optionee shall not assign any of his or her rights under this
Option Agreement without the prior written consent of the Company, which consent
may be withheld in its sole discretion. The Company shall be
permitted to assign its rights or obligations under this Option Agreement, but
no such assignment shall release the Company of any obligations pursuant to this
Option Agreement.
(d) Severability. The
validity, legality or enforceability of the remainder of this Option Agreement
shall not be affected even if one or more of the provisions of this Option
Agreement shall be held to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable in any
respect.
(e) Administration. Any
determination by the Committee in connection with any question or issue arising
under the Plan or this Option Agreement shall be final, conclusive, and binding
on the Optionee, the Company, and all other persons.
(f) Headings. The
section headings in this Option Agreement are inserted only as a matter of
convenience, and in no way define, limit or interpret the scope of this Option
Agreement or of any particular section.
(g) Counterparts. This
Option Agreement may be executed simultaneously in two or more counterparts,
each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall
constitute one and the same instrument.
(h) Entire Option Agreement;
Governing Law. The provisions of the Plan are incorporated
herein by reference. The Plan and this Option Agreement constitute
the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof
and supersede in their entirety all prior undertakings and agreements of the
Company and the Optionee with respect to the subject matter hereof, and may not
be modified adversely to the Optionee’s interest except by means of a writing
signed by the Company and the Optionee. This Option Agreement is
governed by the laws of the State of New York applicable to contracts executed
in and to be performed in that State.
12. No Guarantee of Continued
Service. THE OPTIONEE ACKNOWLEDGES AND AGREES THAT THE VESTING
OF SHARES PURSUANT TO THE VESTING SCHEDULE HEREOF IS EARNED ONLY BY CONTINUING
AS A SERVICE PROVIDER AT THE WILL OF THE COMPANY (NOT THROUGH THE ACT OF BEING
HIRED, BEING GRANTED THE OPTION OR ACQUIRING SHARES HEREUNDER). THE
OPTIONEE FURTHER ACKNOWLEDGES AND AGREES THAT THIS OPTION AGREEMENT, THE OPTION
GRANTED HEREUNDER, THE TRANSACTIONS CONTEMPLATED HEREUNDER AND THE VESTING
SCHEDULE SET FORTH HEREIN DO NOT CONSTITUTE AN EXPRESS OR IMPLIED PROMISE OF
CONTINUED ENGAGEMENT AS A SERVICE PROVIDER FOR THE VESTING PERIOD, FOR ANY
PERIOD, OR AT ALL, AND SHALL NOT INTERFERE IN ANY WAY WITH THE OPTIONEE’S RIGHT
OR THE COMPANY’S RIGHT TO TERMINATE THE OPTIONEE’S RELATIONSHIP AS A SERVICE
PROVIDER AT ANY TIME, WITH OR WITHOUT CAUSE.
o O
o
EXHIBIT
B
LINCOLN
EDUCATIONAL SERVICES CORPORATION
2005
LONG-TERM INCENTIVE PLAN
EXERCISE
NOTICE
Lincoln
Educational Services Corporation
200
Executive Drive, Suite 340
West
Orange, New Jersey 07052
Attention: Secretary
1. Exercise of
Option. Effective as of today, _____________, _____, the
undersigned (the “Optionee”) hereby
elects to exercise the Optionee’s option to purchase _________ Ordinary Shares
(the “Shares”)
of Lincoln Educational Services Corporation (the “Company”), under and
pursuant to the 2005 Long-Term Incentive Plan (the “Plan”) and the Share
Option Agreement dated ____________, ____ (the “Option
Agreement”). Unless otherwise defined herein, the capitalized
terms in this notice of exercise (the “Exercise Notice”)
shall have the meanings ascribed to those terms in the Plan.
2. Delivery of
Payment. The Optionee herewith delivers to the Company the
full Exercise Price of the Shares with respect to which the Optionee is
exercising the Option, and any and all withholding taxes due in connection with
the exercise of the Option.
3. Representations of the
Optionee. The Optionee hereby acknowledges that the Optionee
has received and read, and understands the Plan and the Option Agreement,
including the Option Rules, and agrees to abide by and be bound by their terms
and conditions.
4. Rights as
Stockholder. Until the issuance of the Shares (as evidenced by
the appropriate entry on the books of the Company or of a duly authorized
transfer agent of the Company), no right to vote or receive dividends or any
other rights as a stockholder shall exist with respect to the Optioned Shares,
notwithstanding the exercise of the Option. The Shares shall be
issued to the Optionee as soon as practicable after the Option is exercised in
accordance with the Option Agreement. No adjustment shall be made for
a dividend or other right for which the record date is prior to the date of
issuance except as provided in Section 13 of the Plan.
5. Tax
Consultation. The Optionee hereby acknowledges that he or she
understands that the Optionee may suffer adverse tax consequences as a result of
the Optionee’s purchase or disposition of the Shares. The Optionee
hereby represents that the Optionee has consulted with any tax consultants the
Optionee deems advisable in connection with the purchase or disposition of the
Shares and that the Optionee is not relying on the Company for any tax
advice.
6. Interpretation. Any
dispute regarding the interpretation of this Exercise Notice shall be submitted
by the Optionee or by the Company forthwith to the Committee, which shall review
such dispute at its next regular meeting. The resolution of such a
dispute by the Committee shall be final and binding on all parties.
7. Governing Law;
Severability. This Exercise Notice is governed by the laws of
the State of New York applicable to contracts executed in and to be performed in
that State.
8. Entire
Agreement. The Plan and Option Agreement are incorporated
herein by reference. This Exercise Notice, the Plan, and the Option
Agreement constitute the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the
subject matter hereof and supersede in their entirety all prior undertakings and
agreements of the Company and the Optionee with respect to the subject matter
hereof, and may not be modified adversely to the Optionee’s interest except by
means of a writing signed by the Company and the Optionee.
[SIGNATURE
PAGE FOLLOWS]
IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, this Exercise Notice is deemed made as of the date first set
forth above.
Submitted
by:
|
|
Accepted
by:
|
|
|
|
OPTIONEE
|
|
LINCOLN
EDUCATIONAL SERVICES CORPORATION
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signature
|
|
By
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Print
Name
|
|
Title
|
|
|
|
Address:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date
Received
|
ex10_13.htm
EXHIBIT
10.13
[Standard Form of Restricted Stock
Agreement]
LINCOLN
EDUCATIONAL SERVICES CORPORATION
2005
LONG-TERM INCENTIVE PLAN
RESTRICTED
STOCK AGREEMENT
Date of
Award: __________________
Participant:
__________________
Lincoln Educational Services
Corporation (the “Company”) hereby
grants the Participant [_____] shares of restricted common stock of the Company
(the “Restricted
Shares”), pursuant to the provisions of the Company’s 2005 Long-Term
Incentive Plan (the “Plan”).
This
grant of the Restricted Shares shall be subject to the terms and conditions of
the Plan and this Award Agreement, including, but not limited to, the transfer
restrictions set forth in Section C hereof and the cancellation provisions of
Section B hereof. The Plan provides a complete description of the
terms and conditions governing all Awards granted thereunder. This
Award Agreement is subject to the terms and conditions of the Plan, as amended
from time to time, and to such rules and regulations as the Committee may adopt
under the Plan. If there is any inconsistency between the Plan and
this Award Agreement, the Plan’s terms (or applicable rules and regulations of
the Committee) shall control and supersede and replace any terms of this Award
Agreement that conflict with the terms of the Plan.
All
capitalized terms shall have the meanings ascribed to them in the Plan, unless
specifically set forth otherwise herein.
|
(1)
|
Subject
to the Participant’s continued employment with the Company and its
Subsidiaries (the “Company
Group”), [ ____ ] of the Restricted Shares shall vest on [ ____ ]
(each, a “Vesting
Date”). Any fractional Restricted Shares resulting from
the application of the vesting schedule shall be aggregated and the
Restricted Shares resulting from such aggregation shall vest [
____].
|
|
(2)
|
Upon
vesting, the Restricted Shares shall no longer be subject to the transfer
restrictions pursuant to Section C or cancellation pursuant to Section
B.
|
|
(B)
|
Termination of
Employment and Change in Control. Unless otherwise set
forth in an employment agreement between the Company and the Participant
in effect as of the Date of Grant, if, prior to a Vesting Date, the
Participant’s employment with the Company Group terminates for any reason,
the unvested Restricted Shares shall be cancelled immediately and the
Participant shall immediately forfeit any rights to the Restricted Shares;
provided,
however,
that in accordance with Section 6(c) of the Plan, the Committee
may elect, in its sole discretion, prior to or in connection with such
termination of employment, or upon a Change in Control, to provide for the
vesting and payment of some or all of the Participant’s then outstanding
Restricted Shares.
|
|
(C)
|
Transferability. Pursuant
to Section 12 of the Plan, the Restricted Shares are not transferable
other than by last will and testament or by the laws of descent and
distribution, and the Participant’s rights under this Award Agreement
shall be exercisable during the Participant’s lifetime by the Participant
only.
|
|
(D)
|
Rights as a
Stockholder. The Participant shall have, with respect to
the Restricted Shares, all the rights of a stockholder of the Company,
including, if applicable, the right to vote the Restricted Shares and to
receive any dividends, subject to the restrictions set forth in the Plan
and this Award Agreement.
|
|
(E)
|
Dividends and
Distributions. Any shares of Common Stock or other
securities of the Company received by the Participant as a result of a
distribution to holders of Restricted Shares or as a dividend on the
Restricted Shares shall be subject to the same restrictions as the related
Restricted Shares, and all references to Restricted Shares hereunder shall
be deemed to include such shares of Common Stock or other
securities.
|
|
(F)
|
Share
Certificates. The certificate representing the shares of
Common Stock covered by the Restricted Shares shall be held in custody by
the Company until the restrictions thereon shall have
lapsed. As a condition of the award of Restricted Shares, the
Participant shall deliver to the Company a stock power, endorsed in blank,
relating to such shares of Common Stock. The Committee may
cause a legend or legends to be put on the certificate to make appropriate
reference to such restrictions as the Committee may deem advisable under
the Plan or as may be required by the rules, regulations, and other
requirements of the Securities and Exchange Commission, any exchange that
lists the shares of Common Stock, and any applicable federal or state
laws.
|
|
(1)
|
The
Restricted Shares are discretionary awards. Neither this Award
Agreement nor the Plan confers on the Participant any right or entitlement
to receive compensation or bonus in any specific amount for any future
fiscal year (including, without limitation, any grants of future Awards
under the Plan) and do not impact in any way the Company Group’s
determination of the amount, if any, of the Participant’s compensation or
bonus. The Restricted Shares do not constitute salary, wages,
regular compensation, recurrent compensation or contractual compensation
for the year of grant or any later year and shall not be included in, nor
have any effect on, the determination of employment-related rights or
benefits under law or any employee benefit plan or similar arrangement
provided by the Company Group (including, without limitation, severance,
termination of employment and pension benefits), unless otherwise
specifically provided for under the terms of such plan or arrangement or
by the Company Group. The benefits provided pursuant to the
Restricted Shares are in no way secured, guaranteed or warranted by
Company Group.
|
|
(2)
|
The
Restricted Shares are awarded to the Participant by virtue of the
Participant’s employment with, and services performed for, the Company
Group. Neither this Award Agreement nor the Plan constitutes an
employment agreement. Nothing in either this Award Agreement or
the Plan shall modify the terms of the Participant’s
employment.
|
|
(3)
|
Subject
to the terms of any applicable employment agreement, the Company reserves
the right to change the terms and conditions of the Participant’s
employment, including the division, subsidiary or department in which the
Participant is employed. This Award Agreement, the Plan, the
grant of Restricted Shares, and/or any action taken or omitted to be taken
under this Award Agreement or the Plan shall not be deemed to create or
confer on the Participant any right to be retained in the employ of the
Company Group, or to interfere with or to limit in any way the right of
the Company Group to terminate the Participant’s employment at any
time. Moreover, the termination of employment provisions set
forth in Section (B) only apply to the treatment of the Restricted Shares
in the specified circumstances and shall not otherwise affect the
Participant’s employment relationship. By accepting this Award
Agreement, the Participant waives any and all rights to compensation or
damages in consequence of the termination of the Participant’s office or
employment for any reason whatsoever insofar as those rights arise or may
arise from the Participant’s ceasing to have rights under, or be entitled
to receive payment in respect of, the Restricted Shares as a result of
such termination, or from the loss or diminution in value of such rights
or entitlements. This waiver applies whether or not such
termination amounts to a wrongful discharge or unfair
dismissal.
|
|
(1)
|
The
Committee shall have the right to impose such restrictions on the
Restricted Shares as it deems necessary or advisable under applicable
federal securities laws, the rules and regulations of any stock exchange
or market upon which such Shares are then listed and/or traded, and/or
under any blue sky or state securities laws applicable to such
Shares. It is expressly understood that the Committee is
authorized to administer, construe, and make all determinations necessary
or appropriate to administer the Plan and this Award Agreement, all of
which shall be binding upon the
Participant.
|
|
(2)
|
The
Board may, at any time, or from time to time, terminate, amend, modify or
suspend the Plan, and the Board or the Committee may amend or modify this
Award Agreement at any time; provided, however, that
no termination, amendment, modification or suspension shall materially and
adversely alter or impair the rights of the Participant under this Award
Agreement without the Participant’s written
consent.
|
|
(3)
|
Shares
of restricted stock are not subject to Section 409A of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (“Section
409A”). Notwithstanding the forgoing or any provision of
the Plan or this Award Agreement, if any provision of this Award Agreement
or the Plan contravenes Section 409A or could cause the Participant to
incur any tax, interest or penalties under Section 409A, the Committee
may, in its sole discretion and without the Participant’s consent, modify
such provision to (i) comply with, or avoid being subject to, Section
409A, or to avoid the incurrence of any taxes, interest and penalties
under Section 409A, and/or (ii) maintain, to the maximum extent
practicable, the original intent and economic benefit to the Participant
of the applicable provision without materially increasing the cost to the
Company or contravening the provisions of Section 409A. This
Section (H)(3) does not create an obligation on the part of the Company to
modify the Plan or this Award Agreement and does not guarantee that the
Restricted Shares will not be subject to taxes, interest and penalties
under Section 409A.
|
|
(4)
|
Vesting
of the Restricted Shares shall be subject to the Participant satisfying
all applicable federal, state, local and foreign taxes (including the
Participant’s FICA obligation). The Company shall have the
power and the right to (i) deduct or withhold from all amounts payable to
the Participant in connection with the Restricted Shares or otherwise, or
(ii) require the Participant to remit to the Company, an amount sufficient
to satisfy any applicable taxes required by law. Further, the
Company may permit or require the Participant to satisfy, in whole or in
part, the tax obligations by withholding Shares that would otherwise be
received upon vesting of the Restricted
Shares.
|
|
(5)
|
This
Award Agreement shall be subject to all applicable laws, rules, and
regulations, and to such approvals by any governmental agencies or
national securities exchanges as may be required, or the Committee
determines are advisable. The Participant agrees to take all
steps the Company determines are necessary to comply with all applicable
provisions of federal and state securities law in exercising his rights
under this Award Agreement.
|
|
(6)
|
All
obligations of the Company under the Plan and this Award Agreement, with
respect to the Restricted Shares, shall be binding on any successor to the
Company, whether the existence of such successor is the result of a direct
or indirect purchase, merger, consolidation, or otherwise, of all or
substantially all of the business and/or assets of the
Company.
|
|
(7)
|
To
the extent not preempted by federal law, this Award Agreement shall be
governed by, and construed in accordance with, the laws of the State of
New York.
|
IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, this Award Agreement has been executed by the Company by one of
its duly authorized officers as of the Date of Award.
|
LINCOLN
EDUCATIONAL SERVICES CORPORATION |
|
|
|
|
By:
|
|
|
|
Name:
|
|
Title:
|
ex21_1.htm
Exhibit
21.1
Subsidiaries of the
Company
The
following is a list of Lincoln Educational Services Corporation’s
subsidiaries:
Name
|
|
Jurisdiction
|
|
|
|
Lincoln
Technical Institute, Inc. (wholly owned)
|
|
New
Jersey
|
|
|
|
New
England Acquisition LLC (wholly owned)
|
|
Delaware
|
|
|
|
Southwestern
Acquisition LLC (wholly owned)
|
|
Delaware
|
|
|
|
Nashville
Acquisition, LLC (wholly owned through Lincoln Technical Institute,
Inc.)
|
|
Delaware
|
|
|
|
Euphoria
Acquisition, LLC (wholly owned through Lincoln Technical Institute,
Inc.)
|
|
Delaware
|
|
|
|
New
England Institute of Technology at Palm Beach, Inc. (wholly owned through
Lincoln Technical Institute, Inc.)
|
|
Florida
|
|
|
|
Florida
Acquisition, LLC (wholly owned)
|
|
Delaware
|
|
|
|
ComTech
Services Group Inc. (wholly owned through Lincoln Technical Institute,
Inc.)
|
|
New
Jersey
|
ex23.htm
Exhibit
23
Consent
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
We
consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No.
333-126066, 333-132749 and 333-138715 on Form S-8 and in Registration Statement
No. 333-148406 on Form S-3 of our reports dated March 13, 2008 relating to the
consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedule of Lincoln
Educational Services Corporation (which report expressed an unqualified opinion
and includes an explanatory paragraph relating to the adoption of the provisions
of FASB Interpretation No. 48, “Accounting for Uncertainty in Income
Taxes”), and the effectiveness of internal control over financial
reporting appearing in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Lincoln Educational
Services Corporation for the year ended December 31, 2007.
DELOITTE
& TOUCHE LLP
Parsippany,
New Jersey
March 13,
2008
ex31_1.htm
EXHIBIT
31.1
CERTIFICATION
I, David
F. Carney, certify that:
1.
|
I
have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Lincoln Educational
Services Corporation;
|
2.
|
Based
on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this
report;
|
3.
|
Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report;
|
4.
|
The
registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as
defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal
control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and
have:
|
(a) Designed
such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and
procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,
is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the
period in which this report is being prepared;
(b) Designed
such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control
over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide
reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the
preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles;
(c) Evaluated
the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this
report based on such evaluation; and
(d) Disclosed
in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the
registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and
5.
|
The
registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to
the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s
board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
|
(a) All
significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to
adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and
report financial information; and
(b) Any
fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial
reporting.
Date:
March 17, 2008
|
|
|
|
/s/ David F. Carney
|
|
David
F. Carney
|
|
Chairman
& Chief Executive Officer
|
|
ex31_2.htm
EXHIBIT
31.2
CERTIFICATION
I, Cesar
Ribeiro, certify that:
1.
|
I
have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Lincoln Educational
Services Corporation;
|
2.
|
Based
on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this
report;
|
3.
|
Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report;
|
4.
|
The
registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as
defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal
control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and
have:
|
(a) Designed
such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and
procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,
is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the
period in which this report is being prepared;
(b) Designed
such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control
over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide
reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the
preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles;
(c) Evaluated
the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this
report based on such evaluation; and
(d) Disclosed
in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the
registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and
5.
|
The
registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to
the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s
board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
|
(a) All
significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to
adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and
report financial information; and
(b) Any
fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial
reporting.
Date:
March 17, 2008
|
|
|
|
/s/ Cesar Ribeiro
|
|
Cesar
Ribeiro
|
|
Chief
Financial Officer
|
|
ex32.htm
EXHIBIT
32
CERTIFICATION
Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. 1350 as adopted by
Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
Each of
the undersigned, David F. Carney, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of
Lincoln Educational Services Corporation (the “Company”), and Cesar Ribeiro,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, has executed this certification in
connection with the filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission of the
Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31 2007
(the “Report”).
Each of
the undersigned hereby certifies that, to his respective knowledge:
1. The
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
2. The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
Date:
March 17, 2008
/s/ David F. Carney
|
|
David
F. Carney
|
|
Chairman
& Chief Executive Officer
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/
Cesar Ribeiro
|
|
Cesar
Ribeiro
|
|
Chief
Financial Officer
|
|