This is a recent article in the Santa Barbara News Press!!!!!
This is a recent article in the Santa Barbara News Press!!!!!
oh.....and this is about my school....um, yeah.
Following an investigation that included an undercover operation, state education watchdog officials reported that Brooks Institute of Photography has "engaged in a pervasive pattern of misrepresentations" to students and regulators, according to a copy of the report that the News-Press obtained.
The Bureau for Private Postsecondary and Vocational Education of the state Department of Consumer Affairs also said the institute must meet a set of nine conditions, including payment of "equitable restitution" to all students enrolled since mid-1999, to receive approval to operate two more years. Such payments to students could cost the 60-year-old institute millions of dollars.
The report by the bureau, which oversees schools such as Brooks, was the state's official reply to the Santa Barbara-based school's request for an operating permit. It was sent July 11 by certified mail to Greg Strick, president of the for-profit school, which the Chicago-based Career Education Corporation, or CEC, owns.
A school employee and a spokeswoman both said Tuesday that Mr. Strick will be out of town until Thursday and that no other Brooks Institute official is authorized to comment on the matter.
CEC issued a statement taking issue with the bureau's report. It stated that Brooks Institute "intends to file a request for an administrative hearing . . . to present the facts."
The bureau's conditions could take effect only after such a hearing.
The state's investigation was prompted in part by allegations that a former Brooks administrator raised in September 2003, which the News-Press reported.
Cam Van Wingerden, who was in charge of assuring new students had proper academic credentials, filed accusations with the private out-of-state agency that had granted Brooks academic accreditation.
She claimed school officials forged and tampered with student files and administrative records, purportedly so the school's then-new Ventura campus could pass inspection by accreditors. She also charged that Brooks admitted unqualified students to boost attendance and, therefore, tuition income. More than 2,800 students attend the institute, and they pay about $20,000 for annual tuition.
However, the accreditors, of the Accrediting Council for Independent Colleges and Schools, found there was no evidence the school violated that agency's standards.
On Tuesday, Ms. Van Wingerden's attorney, Mark Kleiman, celebrated the California agency's report.
"We think it essentially vindicates her in her charges about how students were being harmed by the school, and in terms of her claims as to what needed to be done to reform the situation," Mr. Kleiman said.
The state's demands "parallel amazingly closely to the things she had been complaining about," he said. Through her attorney, Ms. Van Wingerden declined a request for direct comment.
According to the bureau's report, Brooks Institute has violated state law, specifically the Private Postsecondary Education Reform Act, and it could face denial of its authority to operate.
Among other things, the agency accused the school of "willfully misleading, falsifying and omitting critical information that persuaded prospective students to enroll in educational programs that were advertised and promoted as preparation for a high-paying career" in their fields. It "then encouraged students to constantly apply and receive student financial loans in considerable excess" of potential earnings to repay the money, the report said. The school gave regulators required data, such as school performance, "that was found to be inaccurate, incomplete and misleading," according to the report.
The state's investigation involved an undercover bureau investigator posing as a student, a student survey and on-site evaluations by the bureau, including one surprise visit.
In its statement, CEC challenged the validity of the survey. It said some of the "concerns" the bureau raised "are based upon a limited number of surveys of the institute's graduates. Only 14 of 121 graduates chose to respond."
Aside from student restitution, the bureau said the school should stop enrolling students until it tracks down and verifies job-placement information for "each 2003 graduate" -- to counter inflated claims of career placements -- and provide the new information to every prospective student.
Additionally, the school should inform every prospective student in writing that it "was found to be in violation of the statutes and regulations" governing education in California and that the bureau determined "it is not in the public interest" to issue the facility an unconditional permit to operate."
According to the bureau's report, some students who answered the survey have school debt from about $17,000 to more than $145,000. Brooks made "false and misleading" promises that they would almost certainly get jobs paying enough after graduation to clear that debt, according to the report.
For example, the undercover agent was told "the sky is the limit" in terms of potential income. When she asked again, the school admission official answered, "$50,000 to $150,000 in your first year" and said with that income she would be able to pay for her tuition.
A former Brooks Institute administrator who came forward with allegations of recruiting improprieties after Ms. Van Wingerden said Tuesday she is pleased about the state's action.
"I think that education has lost some of its integrity to these corporate types of schools," Cecilia Schneider said. In 2003, she alleged Brooks recruiters called prospective students "sales leads" and pressured them with falsehoods.
"I think that if the federal taxpayers knew that schools like this make vulgar profits on federal aid money, they'd be very upset," she said. "But most of all, I think it's wrong for a school to lie to students."
At the time, CEC termed Ms. Van Wingerden's claims "false and malicious," and it said Ms. Schneider's complaints were "out of context."
The school's president issued a written denial of all allegations.
Following an investigation that included an undercover operation, state education watchdog officials reported that Brooks Institute of Photography has "engaged in a pervasive pattern of misrepresentations" to students and regulators, according to a copy of the report that the News-Press obtained.
The Bureau for Private Postsecondary and Vocational Education of the state Department of Consumer Affairs also said the institute must meet a set of nine conditions, including payment of "equitable restitution" to all students enrolled since mid-1999, to receive approval to operate two more years. Such payments to students could cost the 60-year-old institute millions of dollars.
The report by the bureau, which oversees schools such as Brooks, was the state's official reply to the Santa Barbara-based school's request for an operating permit. It was sent July 11 by certified mail to Greg Strick, president of the for-profit school, which the Chicago-based Career Education Corporation, or CEC, owns.
A school employee and a spokeswoman both said Tuesday that Mr. Strick will be out of town until Thursday and that no other Brooks Institute official is authorized to comment on the matter.
CEC issued a statement taking issue with the bureau's report. It stated that Brooks Institute "intends to file a request for an administrative hearing . . . to present the facts."
The bureau's conditions could take effect only after such a hearing.
The state's investigation was prompted in part by allegations that a former Brooks administrator raised in September 2003, which the News-Press reported.
Cam Van Wingerden, who was in charge of assuring new students had proper academic credentials, filed accusations with the private out-of-state agency that had granted Brooks academic accreditation.
She claimed school officials forged and tampered with student files and administrative records, purportedly so the school's then-new Ventura campus could pass inspection by accreditors. She also charged that Brooks admitted unqualified students to boost attendance and, therefore, tuition income. More than 2,800 students attend the institute, and they pay about $20,000 for annual tuition.
However, the accreditors, of the Accrediting Council for Independent Colleges and Schools, found there was no evidence the school violated that agency's standards.
On Tuesday, Ms. Van Wingerden's attorney, Mark Kleiman, celebrated the California agency's report.
"We think it essentially vindicates her in her charges about how students were being harmed by the school, and in terms of her claims as to what needed to be done to reform the situation," Mr. Kleiman said.
The state's demands "parallel amazingly closely to the things she had been complaining about," he said. Through her attorney, Ms. Van Wingerden declined a request for direct comment.
According to the bureau's report, Brooks Institute has violated state law, specifically the Private Postsecondary Education Reform Act, and it could face denial of its authority to operate.
Among other things, the agency accused the school of "willfully misleading, falsifying and omitting critical information that persuaded prospective students to enroll in educational programs that were advertised and promoted as preparation for a high-paying career" in their fields. It "then encouraged students to constantly apply and receive student financial loans in considerable excess" of potential earnings to repay the money, the report said. The school gave regulators required data, such as school performance, "that was found to be inaccurate, incomplete and misleading," according to the report.
The state's investigation involved an undercover bureau investigator posing as a student, a student survey and on-site evaluations by the bureau, including one surprise visit.
In its statement, CEC challenged the validity of the survey. It said some of the "concerns" the bureau raised "are based upon a limited number of surveys of the institute's graduates. Only 14 of 121 graduates chose to respond."
Aside from student restitution, the bureau said the school should stop enrolling students until it tracks down and verifies job-placement information for "each 2003 graduate" -- to counter inflated claims of career placements -- and provide the new information to every prospective student.
Additionally, the school should inform every prospective student in writing that it "was found to be in violation of the statutes and regulations" governing education in California and that the bureau determined "it is not in the public interest" to issue the facility an unconditional permit to operate."
According to the bureau's report, some students who answered the survey have school debt from about $17,000 to more than $145,000. Brooks made "false and misleading" promises that they would almost certainly get jobs paying enough after graduation to clear that debt, according to the report.
For example, the undercover agent was told "the sky is the limit" in terms of potential income. When she asked again, the school admission official answered, "$50,000 to $150,000 in your first year" and said with that income she would be able to pay for her tuition.
A former Brooks Institute administrator who came forward with allegations of recruiting improprieties after Ms. Van Wingerden said Tuesday she is pleased about the state's action.
"I think that education has lost some of its integrity to these corporate types of schools," Cecilia Schneider said. In 2003, she alleged Brooks recruiters called prospective students "sales leads" and pressured them with falsehoods.
"I think that if the federal taxpayers knew that schools like this make vulgar profits on federal aid money, they'd be very upset," she said. "But most of all, I think it's wrong for a school to lie to students."
At the time, CEC termed Ms. Van Wingerden's claims "false and malicious," and it said Ms. Schneider's complaints were "out of context."
The school's president issued a written denial of all allegations.