UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 20172021

or

For the transition period from           to           

Commission File Number 0-23245

CAREERPERDOCEO EDUCATION CORPORATION

(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (847) 781-3600

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act of 1933.Yes☒No☐

Indicate by check mark if the Registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.     Yes  ☐No☒

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  ☒No☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate website, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).Yes☒     No☐

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.     ☒

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act.☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed a report on and attestation to its management’s assessment of the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (15 U.S.C. 7262(b)) by the registered public accounting firm that prepared or issued its audit report.  ☒

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is a shell company, as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Yes  ☐No☒

The aggregate market value of the Registrant’s voting common stock held by non-affiliates of the Registrant, based upon the $9.60$12.27 per share closing sale price of the Registrant’s common stock on June 30, 20172021 (the last business day of the Registrant’s most recently completed second quarter), was approximately $570,000,000.$720,000,000. For purposes of this calculation, the Registrant’s directors, executive officers and 10% or greater stockholders have been assumed to be affiliates. This assumption of affiliate status is not necessarily a conclusive determination for other purposes. As of February 16, 2018,18, 2022, the number of outstanding shares of Registrant’s common stock was 69,117,801.68,748,662.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of the Registrant’s Notice of Annual Meeting and Proxy Statement for the Registrant’s 20182022 Annual Meeting of Stockholders are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Report.

CAREERPERDOCEO EDUCATION CORPORATION

FORM 10-K

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART I

Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements

This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains “forward-looking statements,” as defined in Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, that reflect our current expectations regarding our future growth, results of operations, cash flows, performance and business prospects and opportunities, as well as assumptions made by, and information currently available to, our management. We have tried to identify forward-looking statements by using words such as “anticipate,” “believe,” “expect,” “estimate,“plan,” “trend,“seek,” “should,” ”will,” “continue to,” “outlook,” “focused on” and similar expressions, but these words are not the exclusive means of identifying forward-looking statements. These statements are based on information currently available to us and are subject to various risks, uncertainties, and other factors, including, but not limited to, those matters discussed herein under the caption “Risk Factors” that could cause our actual growth, results of operations, financial condition, cash flows, performance, business prospects and opportunities to differ materially from those expressed in, or implied by, these statements. Except as expressly required by the federal securities laws, we undertake no obligation to update such factors or to publicly announce the results of any of the forward-looking statements contained herein to reflect future events, developments, or changed circumstances or for any other reason.

Career Education Corporation (“CEC”) was incorporated in Delaware in 1994. When used in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, the terms “we,” “us,” “our,” “the Company” and “CEC” refer to Career Education Corporation and our wholly-owned subsidiaries. The terms “college,” “institution” and “university” each refer to an individual, branded, for-profit educational institution owned by us and includes its campus locations. The term “campus” refers to an individual main or branch campus operated by one of our colleges, institutions or universities.

BUSINESS OVERVIEW

Career Education’sPerdoceo’s academic institutions offer a quality postsecondary education primarily online to a diverse student population, in a variety of disciplines through online,along with campus-based and blended learning programs. Our two universitiesaccredited institutions – Colorado Technical University (“CTU”) and the American InterContinental University (“AIU”System (“AIUS” or “AIU System”) and Colorado Technical University (“CTU”) – provide degree programs from associate through the master’s or doctoral level as well as associatenon-degree professional development and bachelor’s levels. Bothcontinuing education offerings. Our universities predominantly serveoffer students online withindustry-relevant and career-focused degreeacademic programs that are designed to meet the educational demandsneeds of today’s busy adults. AIUCTU and CTUAIUS continue to show innovation in higher education, advancing new personalized learning technologies like their intellipath™^® learning platform. Career Educationplatform and using data analytics and technology to support students and enhance learning. Perdoceo is committed to providing quality education that closes the gap between learners who seek to advance their careers and employers needing a qualified workforce.

Additionally, CEC is concludingWhen used in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, the process of teaching out a number of campuses as part of the strategic decisionterms “we,” “us,” “our,” “the Company,” “Perdoceo” and “PEC” refer to pursue a transformation strategy aimed at reducing the complexity of operationsPerdoceo Education Corporation and focusing our attention on our University Group institutions. These teach-out campuses are included in our All Other Campuses segment. Students enrolled at these campuses have been afforded the reasonable opportunity to complete their program of study prior to the final teach-out date.

A listing of individual campus locations and web links to Career Education’s institutions can be found at www.careered.com.wholly-owned subsidiaries.

Our reporting segments are determined in accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) Topic 280 – Segment Reportingcorrespond to our accredited institutions.

CTU

CTU is committed to providing quality and are based upon howindustry-relevant higher education to a diverse student population through innovative technology and experienced faculty, enabling the Company analyzes performancepursuit of personal and makes decisions. Each segment representsprofessional goals. CTU is focused on serving adult, non-traditional students seeking career advancement, as well as addressing employer’s needs for a group of postsecondary education providers that offer a variety of academic programs. These segments are organized by key market segments to enhance operational alignment and to enhance brand focus within each segment to more effectively execute our strategic plan and, for our teach-out campuses, to align all teach-out, or non-ongoing operations.

Our three reporting segments as of December 31, 2017 are described below.

1

CTU and AIU collectively comprise our University Group.

All prior period results have been recast to reflect our reporting segments on a comparable basis.

Revenues, operating income (loss) and total assets by reporting segmentinstitutions’ fully-online academic programs for each year. Substantially all of the past three fiscal years are included in Note 16 “Segment Reporting” of the notes to our consolidated financial statements.

The majority of students attending our institutions reside within the United States of America.

CAMPUS LOCATIONS

Our reporting segments, colleges Total student enrollments and universities,student enrollment statistics presented below do not include learners participating in non-degree professional development and their campus locations,continuing education offerings. Additional student enrollment demographic information for our institutions as of February 21, 2018 are summarized in the table below. Campuses that ceased operations prior to February 21, 2018 are not included.December 31, 2021 and 2020 was as follows:

Student Enrollments by Age Group

INDUSTRY BACKGROUND AND COMPETITIONStudent Enrollments by Core Curricula

The domestic postsecondary degree-granting education industry was more than a $565 billion industry through academic year 2014-15, according to a report published in 2017

Student Enrollments by the U.S. Department of Education (“ED” or “the Department”), with approximately 27 million students attending institutions that participate in U.S. federal financial aid programs. The Department projects that enrollment in postsecondary degree-granting institutions is expected to grow approximately 15% over the eleven-year period ending in the fall of 2025 to approximately 23 million students. The majority of our degree-seeking students today have one orDegree Granting Program

2

more non-traditional characteristics (e.g., did not enroll immediately after high school graduation, work full-time, are financially independent for purposes of financial aid eligibility, have dependents other than a spouse or are single parents). These non-traditional students typically are looking to improve their skills and enhance their earning potential within the context of their careers or in pursuit of new careers. As the industry has shifted to more students with non-traditional characteristics, an increasing proportion of colleges and universities are addressing the needs of working students. This includes colleges with well-established brand names that were historically focused on traditional students.

The postsecondary education industry is highly fragmented and increasingly competitive, with no one provider controlling a significant market share. Students choose among providers based on programs and degrees offered, program flexibility and convenience, geographic location, method of instruction (i.e. classroom or online), quality of instruction, employment opportunities, reputation, recruiting effectiveness and cost. Such multi-faceted market fragmentation results in significant differentiation among various education providers.

The Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended and reauthorized (“Higher Education Act”), and the related regulations govern all higher education institutions participating in federal student aid and loan programs under Title IV of the Higher Education Act (“Title IV Programs”). According to the National Center for Education Statistics (“NCES”), there were approximately 6,800 Title IV eligible postsecondary education institutions in the United States for the academic year 2016-17, including approximately 2,900 for-profit schools; approximately 2,000 public, non-profit schools; and approximately 1,900 private, non-profit schools. According to the Department, over the 12-month period July 1, 2015 through June 30, 2016 approximately 27 million students were attending institutions that participate in the various Title IV Programs.

Our primary public company competitors in the for-profit postsecondary education industry are currently: Adtalem Global Education Inc., American Public Education, Inc., Bridgepoint Education, Inc., Capella Education Company, Grand Canyon Education, Inc., Kaplan, Inc. (a division of the Graham Holdings Company) and Strayer Education, Inc. However, a number of proposed transactions have been announced by these companies that if successfully concluded will reduce this list in the future. We also compete with a number of privately held for-profit and non-profit postsecondary institutions, including community colleges. In addition, there is growing competition from online programs among postsecondary education institutions, including for-profit publicly traded and privately held institutions, as well as non-profit institutions that are increasing online offerings in response to the growing demand.

Our postsecondary institutions are subject to significant regulations which provide for a regulatory triad by mandating specific regulatory responsibilities for each of the following:

Extensive and increasingly complex ED regulations governing our institutions as well as others in the postsecondary education industry have been enacted. These regulations, coupled with the increased focus by the U.S. Congress on the role that for-profit educational institutions play in higher education, as well as the evolving needs and objectives of students and employers, economic constraints affecting educational institutions and increased focus on affordability and value may cause increased competition across the industry as well as contribute to changes in business operating strategies.

Although competition exists, for-profit educators serve a segment of the market for postsecondary education that we believe has not been fully addressed by traditional public and private universities. Non-profit public and private institutions can face limited financial resources to expand their offerings in response to growth or changes in the demand for education, due to a combination of state funding challenges, significant expenditures required for research and the professor tenure system. Certain private institutions also may control enrollments to preserve the perceived prestige and exclusivity of their degree offerings. In contrast, for-profit providers of postsecondary education offer potential students the greater flexibility and convenience of their institutions' programmatic offerings and learning structure and an emphasis on applied content and the use of technology in the delivery of the education. At the same time, the share of the postsecondary education market that has been captured by for-profit providers remains relatively small. As a result, we believe that in spite of regulatory changes and other challenges facing the industry, for-profit postsecondary education providers continue to have significant opportunities to address the demand for postsecondary education.

We believe that the online postsecondary education market continues to grow and gain acceptance across employers seeking qualified candidates for employment. Growth in the postsecondary education industry is being driven by online enrollment for a variety of reasons, including:

3

Our Competitive Strengths

We believe that the following strengths differentiate our business:

Strong execution against our student initiatives and investments. The successful execution of our transformation strategy has enabled us to undertake new initiatives and investments to improve student experiences. Our Universities have also continued to focus on refining and executing operational changes with the same goal. We have revised our admissions and advising operating models, which we believe has improved accountability and coordination between the functions, ultimately helping our students. There is now more accountability at the advisor and manager levels to promote and enhance student engagement. As an education company, academic outcomes are the most relevant and critical measure of our success. Our institutions are dedicated to recruiting and retaining quality faculty and instructors with relevant industry experience and appropriate academic credentials. During 2017 we opened two new admissions and advising centers near Phoenix, Arizona and increased our investments within the student advising, admissions and academic functions. We continue to invest and leverage technology to further enhance student learning and promote faculty engagement. This is evidenced by our advancements in mobile technology for our students and faculty that has made overall classroom activities easier to complete. We have also redesigned the academic calendar within AIU, which better aligns with student lives, thereby positively impacting student retention. We seek to identify emerging industry trends in order to understand the evolving educational needs of our students and graduates and we continue to work with our University regulators to expand our program offerings to provide students with increased choices.

Proprietary online instructional platform. Development of a virtual campus that engages online students with their instructor, their peers and the content is critical to the achievement of improved student learning outcomes. CEC’s online instructional delivery is accomplished utilizing an innovative, student-focused proprietary learning management system. While online content delivery is very common today, CEC’s course content delivery system, M.U.S.E. (My Unique Student Experience), has several features that make it distinctive in the education marketplace. Designed around the students, M.U.S.E. is a rich, engaging student experience that represents an innovative online method of delivering content that includes the following capabilities:

In addition, CTU and AIU each have a student mobile application which was created to complement students’ mobile-centric lives. The mobile applications offer users the ability to connect with their university, track grades and degree progress in real-time and participate in courses from the palm of their hand. The student benefits of the mobile applications include motivating students and helping them connect with the university and remain on track with their course of study. During 2017, CTU and AIU also rolled out a faculty mobile application which provides informative dashboards, ability to complete tasks on the go and enhanced outreach and communication capabilities that we believe will make teacher-student interactions easier and more effective.

Innovative personalized learning technology. Through our equity investment in CCKF, a Dublin-based educational technology company that provides intelligent, adaptive systems to power the delivery of personalized learning, we have strengthened our leadership position as a technology innovator in higher education and as a company dedicated to student success. Our personalized learning content was developed by teams of our own instructors and has been integrated across many of our curricula. We have a perpetual license to this technology, which, when integrated with our proprietary learning management system, we refer to as intellipath.^TM This academic and technological breakthrough continues to advance our understanding of the learning process and support improved student outcomes. Personalized learning, supported by intellipath technology, allows us to visualize how each student learns through their interaction with the material.

Intellipath serves as a powerful platform to help our students learn. It identifies and gives more time in areas where students need more help, while moving past areas they already know. In many respects, personalized learning serves as an excellent way to facilitate and demonstrate mastery in a competency-based learning environment. Personalized learning is changing the nature of higher education by measuring real-time knowledge growth minute-by-minute and understanding of the material on a student-by-student basis.

The success of this personalized learning platform lies in the abundance of data it collects, which in turn helps our instructors determine how to structure courses, deliver material to students, predict and mitigate individual student challenges and identify teaching practices that yield the strongest results. A major difference between our platform and others is that it focuses on student learning achievements rather than solely on student satisfaction or how fast it facilitates a student to complete assignments.

Seasonality

Our quarterly net revenues and income may fluctuate primarily as a result of the pattern of student enrollments. For CTU, the seasonality of our business has decreased over the last several years due to an increased percentage of students enrolling in online programs, which generally experience less seasonal fluctuations than campus-based programs. Within AIU, a calendar redesign was implemented during 2017 which will impact quarterly comparability in the foreseeable future as each quarter may have non-

4

comparable revenue-earnings days. While operating costs for our institutions generally do not fluctuate significantly on a quarterly basis, we do traditionally increase our advertising investments during the first and third fiscal quarters in relation to the back to school seasons. Revenues, operating income (loss) and net income (loss) by quarter for each of the past two fiscal years are included in Note 18 “Quarterly Financial Summary” of the notes to our consolidated financial statements.

BUSINESSGUIDING PRINCIPLES AND OPERATING STRATEGYSTRATEGIC PRIORITIES

To compete successfully in today’s demanding economy, people benefit from higher education that provides a foundation of knowledge and skills they can use in the workplace and to build meaningful careers. We aim to provide effective, industry-relevantbecome a leading provider of online postsecondary education to non-traditional students, including adult learners. The core guiding principles we focus on in our pursuit of this goal are:

Our strategic priorities that we believe will support our goal to become a diverse population, providing our students the opportunity to use theirleading provider of online postsecondary education to advance personallynon-traditional students and professionally.

Our strategy is aimed at leveraging near-term demandsposition the company for higher education with a career focus, while continuing to build the capabilities necessary to deliverlong-term sustainable and responsible long-term growth are:

OUR BUSINESS

Through our organizationaccredited academic institutions, we offer a quality postsecondary education primarily online to a diverse student population, along with campus-based and its institutions. Withinblended learning programs. We pursue a student-first mindset in our University Group, we are focused on increasingefforts to provide student support throughout the efficacy of our programs while seeking operational efficiencies in an effortacademic life cycle, from enrollment and orientation through ongoing coaching and learning leading up to continually improve the student experience across the entire student lifecycle - for our campus-based students as well as our online students.

The importance of quality education at our institutions cannot be overstated. The quality of the education we provide and the manner ingraduation, which we provide it can directly lead to betterbelieve enhances overall student outcomes. We will strive to offer new programs at institutions and particular campuses as there is both student demand for the education, as well as workplace demand for graduates in that field of study. As we continue to innovate in our delivery of online education, we will continue to build upon that history and continue developing new education technologies that enhance the learning experience for students. We believe our intellipath™ personalized learning platform provides our organization and its institutions a strategic advantage by providing a more customized student experience and we will continue to expand its use as a key differentiator.

Growing the academic and economic value of our University platforms by enhancing student retentionexperiences and academic outcomes also aligns with the interest of creating stockholder value. Our execution on our transformation efforts has given us the ability to focus our resources and attention on our University institutions.outcomes. We are committed to investing in our University brands,academic institutions and student support technology, and faculty, all of which contributewe believe enables our student support teams to provide customized service that contributes to positive student experiences, retentionexperiences. Technology is a key enabler and differentiator for us and we are continuing to expand the use of artificial intelligence and machine learning to additional areas of the academic outcomes.life cycle. We believe that our technology innovations provide students with tools that enable them to focus on educational content in a manner that is best suited to their personal learning style.

Our business and operating strategy is built upon core guiding principles, including:

Sustainable and Responsible Growth

Marketing, Student Recruitment and Marketingthe Student Enrollment Process

Our institutionsuniversities seek highly motivated students with both the desire and ability to complete their academic programs of choice. To promote interest among potential students, eachour universities develop and engage in a variety of marketing activities which build awareness of our universities engages in a wide variety of marketing activities.among prospective students. Our marketing programs are designed to differentiate our brands in the marketplace and maximizeenhance each institution’s opportunity to serve a targeted section of the potential student population. We also have the ability to provide unique online and blended learning environments through our proprietary learning system.

We seek to increase enrollment at our University Group through marketing programs designed to differentiate our brands in the marketplace and maximize each institution’suniversity’s opportunity to serve a targeted section of the potential student population.

Within our University Group, we continue our focus on expanding strategic relationships with corporate partners. We expect these relationships to result in new student interest through increased awareness of our brands for the employees of our corporate partners.

Admissions

CEC has historically servedPerdoceo serves a diverse student population. Our students representhave a broad range of educational and employment experiences contributingwhich contributes to their college-level readiness. Each of our University Group institutionsuniversities has an admissions department that isfunction responsible for interacting with individualsprospective students interested in applying to an institution. Admissions advisors serve as prospective students’ primary contacts, providing information to help them make informed enrollment decisionsinstitution after they have expressed interest in learning more about our academic institutions and assisting them

5

with the completion of the enrollment process. The admission advisors also have a responsibility to provide guidance and support through the application process and orientation as well as assist each student as they transition to their first class.

The admissions and entrance processes for our institutions are intended to identify students who are interested in meeting the requirements of their chosen program of study. We believe that a success-oriented student body ultimately results in higher student retention, increased student and employer satisfaction, and lower default rates on government loans utilized by a student.programs. Generally, to be qualified for admission to one of our institutions,universities, an applicant must have received a high school diploma or a recognized equivalent, such as a General Education Development certificate. Some of our programs may also require applicants to meet other program admissions requirements.

We use data analytics to help us identify and focus on prospective students who are more likely to succeed at one of our universities. Our prospective student outreach process uses technology to provide a more customized approach to enable us to more effectively provide prospective students with relevant information to help them make more informed academic decisions.

One of our technology initiatives over the last few years to expand the use of artificial intelligence (“AI”) and machine learning throughout the academic life cycle is AIU’s AI-based virtual assistant “chatbot” that we named Lucy. Lucy has streamlined the process for prospective students who want to learn about our institution and can address approximately 92% of their questions while continuing to learn from her interactions. If Lucy is unable to address a question, the prospective student is referred to our admissions personnel for additional assistance. Throughout 2021, we continued to expand the use of chatbots across different aspects of the academic life cycle at both CTU and AIU.

Our technology enhancements enable our admissions staff to customize their prospective student outreach and engagement strategies based on students’ prior educational experience, degree and areas of program interest, thus providing a more meaningful and relevant interaction with the prospective student. We believe prospective students have an improved overall experience in communications with our admissions personnel due to these enhancements.

3

Admissions advisors serve as one of the prospective students’ primary contacts, providing information to help them make informed enrollment decisions and assisting them with the completion of the enrollment process. The admissions advisors also have a responsibility to provide guidance and support through the enrollment application process and student orientation as well as assist each student as they transition into their first class.

Once a decision has been made to enroll at one of our academic institutions, the financial aid team works with the prospective student, providing them with information about various loans and grants available to finance their education. The focus is on getting these students financially prepared for school in a timely manner so that they can focus on their academic activities.

Every enrolled student is offered an orientation that is designed to prepare them to begin classes at our institutions. This orientation process encourages students to engage actively in preparatory activities which can include a personalized learning module, a discussion board assignment and an individual project. This orientation program also provides the opportunity for students to understand our academic and support services. We believe completion of these activities will better prepareprepares a student to make an informed decision about pursuing their education as well as to be more successful as it simulates their classroom experience both online and in a campus-based environment. Campus-based students have the opportunity to engage with faculty, staff and current students during orientation which builds confidence and a comfort level in their new learning environment. Orientation is free of charge and offered to all students prior to the start of the first course. Completion of orientation does not financially obligate students, nor does it require students to continue their education with the university.

Additionally, new students who attend online programs at our universities and do not want to continue have 21 days after the start of their program to notify the university of their intention to withdraw. Students who notify and withdraw from the university within 21 days will not be responsible for any tuition-related expenses and are refunded any amounts they have paid in tuition and other institutional fees.

Corporate Partnerships

Our universities have focused on expanding strategic relationships with corporate partners. During 2021, CTU increased the size of its corporate partnership team during the first half of the year to further engage prospective employers to leverage their tuition assistance programs and provide a debt-free education to their employees. We expect these relationships to result in new student interest through increased awareness of our institutions for the employees of our corporate partners. Corporate partnerships provide us with an opportunity to cancelconnect with and educate a population of students we would otherwise not likely have access to. Students who attend our institutions through corporate partnerships are awarded grants from the applicable university to partially offset their enrollmenttuition costs, the amount of which depends on the agreement with each respective corporate partner. In addition, they typically receive some funding from their employer towards their tuition. Although the amount paid by these students results in lower revenue per student due to the grants awarded from the applicable university, the recruiting, marketing and support costs associated with these students are lower as well. Further, these students are more likely to start class and tend to be more persistent in their pursuit of long-term learning, which we believe will result in higher life-time value per student. As of December 31, 2021, approximately 19.1% and 4.8% of total student enrollments at any time during orientation without incurringCTU and AIUS, respectively, are a financial obligation.result of corporate partnership agreements.

Student Retention and Academic Outcomes

We emphasize the importance ofOur institutions focus on improving student retention at eachand enhancing academic outcomes. Investments in student serving processes, including the use of technology, is a key focus to support these efforts. Our faculty and student advisors provide frequent assistance and feedback to students during their course of academic study. We support increased communication between our institutions.faculty and students by providing faculty with various technology enablers such as a two-way messaging platform and enhanced data reporting and analytics to help them provide meaningful academic support and information. As is the case at any postsecondary educational institution, a portion of our students fail to completewithdraw from their academic programs for a variety of academic, financial or personal reasons. We also employ student advisors that provide feedbackreasons, and assistance to students during their course of study. We seek to improve retention rates by building a strong connection between our faculty and students and promoting instructional innovation, such as our M.U.S.E. instructional platform and our student and faculty mobile applications. Thesethese efforts as well as our intellipath personalized learning technology, are designed to assisthelp our students to remain in school and succeed.

Through incremental investmentssucceed in our student financial aid team, we have increased our document collection efforts with students. By ensuring that students have provided the correct documents timely, a student will be able to start their education with the knowledge of what loans, grants and financing are available to them, thus providing them with the capability of funding their education. Our staff assists students so they can determine the best funding solution for their educational needs as well as provides information regarding the transfer of credit into the institution.academic program.

Our student advising model promotes specific and deliberate collaboration between faculty and student advisors, which we believe elevates accountabilityenhances effectiveness and effectivenessprovides students with consistent support and communication. Student advisors continue to work with students throughout their academic program to provide relevant and specific feedback and guidance as they progress through their classes. Additionally, a team of our retention efforts. staff members from advising, admissions and financial aid work directly with each new student creating a student-service atmosphere and encouraging quality interactions.

Coupled with the student advising model, AIUour academic institutions continually review course content, pairing and CTU have made changes to course sequencing to buildensure workload levels slowlybuild gradually as students develop skills and motivation.

AIU has fully transitionedacclimate to a graduate team model while CTU is in the process of aligning to a similar student-oriented operating structure. The graduate team model structure personalizes student facing services in financial aid, admissions and advising andcourse expectations which we believe improves academic outcomes. Courses have been redesigned to accommodate skill development holistically, which we believe will support progressive learning.

AIU’s student-centric framework focuses on having students interact with their admissions advisor from enrollment through the end of their first academic session and be subsequently supported by faculty and student advisors. We believe this structure helps increase accountability and ultimately improves overall student experiences and retention. This cross-functional strategy is aimed at improving student engagement throughout the student’s academic life cycle, with particular emphasis on the important onboarding phase and first academic term as the students adjust to their academic program.

Student Enrollment StatisticsTrident’s flexible learning approach provides for more time between assignment due dates, which helps students balance full-time academic progression with other priorities.

Our total student enrollment as of December 31, 2017 and 2016 was approximately 34,800 students and 36,600 students, respectively. Included in total student enrollment were approximately 34,700 students and 33,600 students, respectively, for our University institutions, with approximately 32,300 students and 31,200 students, respectively, enrolled in our University Group fully-online academic programs. Related student enrollment demographic information for our University Group as of December 31, 2017 and 2016 was as follows:

University Group Student Enrollment by Age Group

64

University Group Student Enrollment by Core Curricula

University Group Student Enrollment by Degree Granting Program

Academic QualityCTU leverages data analytics to provide proactive outreach and Integrity

We believepersonalized advising to improve student retention and academic outcomesoutcomes. This approach is intended to help us reach the right student at the right time with the right support, which we expect will increase learning and career readiness are attainedcourse completion by our students as a result of the quality learning experience they are provided. Those learning experiences are facilitated by career-oriented program development, engaging instructional delivery and qualified faculty.students. We continue to refine our data analytics process to enable our student advisors to be more effective in their student engagement efforts.

Program Development

Our universities develop and deliver a variety of programs primarily resulting in the award of credentials ranging from certificates and diplomas to master’s and doctoral degrees in career-oriented programs of study in core curricula areas of business studies, information technologiestechnology and health education.

CEC’sOur curricula, instructional delivery tools, and experienced faculty comprise the learning experience that appeals toprovides our student population and provides them with a unique opportunity to develop the knowledge, skills and competencies required for specific careers. The curriculum development process focuses on desired career needs, while considering relative competencies necessary to achieve these career needs, as well as any applicable recommendations set forth by advisory boards, programmatic accrediting agencies and industry standards. Subsequently, learning objectives are identified and courses are developed which foster student engagement in activities and optimally result in the attainment of program learning outcomes.

During 2021, our institutions expanded their offerings with both the acquisition of and internal development of non-degree professional development and continuing education programs. These online courses offer learning opportunities where one can develop skills and knowledge in a specific endeavor or area of interest. Our non-degree professional development and continuing education programs are designed to assist adult learners in maintaining existing credentials and obtaining additional job-focused credentials and can help workers increase skills and prepare for changes in the workplace.

Instructional Delivery

CEC’sOur instructional delivery for our degree programs is based uponon the belief that learning is dependent upondepends on instructional methodologies that facilitate student engagement with the instructor, with other students, and with the course content. This engagement is fundamental to student learning outcomes, regardless of whether instruction occurs within a physical or virtual classroom. We continue to focus on innovation in our delivery of online education to enhance the learning experience for students.

During 2021, we began a multi-year project to enhance and upgrade our student technology infrastructure. This includes several upgrades to our mobile platform and virtual campus and a redesign of our digital toolsets and technology that our faculty and student support teams utilize to serve and educate students throughout their academic life cycle. These upgrades are expected to further enhance student experiences, especially for our non-traditional adult learners, while driving efficiencies within the business.

Learning Management System

Construction of, and ongoing enhancement to, a virtual campus that engages online students with their instructor, their peers and the content is critical to the achievement of student learning outcomes. CEC’sCTU and AIU’s online instructional delivery is accomplished utilizingusing an innovative, student-focused learning management system. While online content delivery is very common today, CEC’sour course content delivery system M.U.S.E. (My Unique Student Experience), has several features that make it distinctive in the education marketplace.distinctive. Designed around the students, M.U.S.E.our course content delivery system is a rich, engaging student experience that represents an innovative online method of delivering content.

CEC continues to invest in its methods for delivering online education. CECPersonalized Learning Technology

Perdoceo has implemented the use of sophisticated personalized learning technologies referredthrough our virtual campus. Through our equity investment in and license of technology from CCKF, a Dublin-based educational technology company that provides intelligent, adaptive systems to power the delivery of personalized learning, we have strengthened our leadership position as a technology innovator in higher education and as a company dedicated to student success. Our personalized learning content was developed by teams of our own instructors and has been integrated across many of our curricula. We have a perpetual license to this technology, which, when integrated with our proprietary learning management system, we refer to as intellipath.^®

Intellipath, within serves as a powerful platform to help our University institutions. students learn. It identifies and gives more time in areas where students need more help, while moving past areas they already know, thereby giving students more control of their academic progress. Students report feeling a stronger sense of confidence as they proactively address learning gaps and engage in the learning process at a deeper level. In many respects, personalized learning serves as an excellent way to facilitate and demonstrate mastery in a competency-based learning environment. Personalized learning is changing the nature of higher education by measuring real-time knowledge growth minute-by-minute and understanding of the material on a student-by-student basis.

Our roll-outimplementation of these technological toolsintellipath is coupled with extensive faculty training. The success of this personalized learning platform lies in the abundance of data it collects, which in turn helps our instructors determine how to structure courses, deliver material to students, predict and mitigate individual student challenges and identify teaching practices that yield the strongest results. Continuous assessment facilitates the development of individualized, dynamic learning maps that both illustrate where student mastery has been achieved and where additional work is needed. Both the student and the instructor can see in real time where learning has taken place

5

and where effort still needs to be applied. Additionally, students A major difference between our platform and others is that it focuses on student learning achievements rather than solely on student satisfaction or how fast it facilitates a student to complete assignments.

This academic and technological breakthrough continues to advance our understanding of the learning process and supports improved student academic outcomes. We believe our intellipath personalized learning platform provides our institutions a strategic advantage by providing a more customized student experience.

Mobile Applications

Students atCTU and AIUhave access to a mobile application and two-way messaging platform which waswere created to complement students’ mobile-centric lives. Approximately 95% of our students within these universities have opted in for the mobile application and to receive mobile notifications. Our students and staff are using the messenger due to its ease and simplicity. The student benefits of these technology innovations include the ability to connect with their university in a different way, communicate efficiently with faculty, upload required documentation, track grades and degree progress in real-time and participate in courses from the palm of their hand, all of which contribute to increased student engagement. CTU and AIU also have a faculty mobile application include motivating studentswhich provides informative dashboards, ability to complete tasks on the go and helping them connect with the universityenhanced outreach and remain on track with their course of study.communication capabilities that we believe make teacher-student interactions easier and more effective.

7

Faculty

CECOur institutions employ more than 2,000approximately 2,300 credentialed, geographically disbursed,dispersed, full-time and adjunct (i.e., part-time) faculty who facilitate learning in our classrooms and virtual classrooms. Our faculty are hired, assigned, developed and evaluated in accordance with current accepted higher education practices and in accordance with state, institutional accreditation and programmatic accreditation standards. Generally, all colleges and universitiesour institutions require the instructor for any degree program courses to have a degree at least one level higher than the level of the course being taught (with the exception of faculty in our doctoral programs) plus teaching and/or industry experience. General education faculty members must possess at least a master’s degree. The average tenure of a CECPerdoceo faculty member is greater than fiveapproximately six years. We believe the longevity of our instructors is a testament to the focus we place on student learning and the consistent quality we strive for in our classrooms.

Faculty Competencies

With the input of faculty and academic leadership across each ofat our institutions,universities, we have developed a set of instructor competencies that we believe are critical to student success and institutional effectiveness. These competencies provide the basis for faculty recruitment, hiring, orientation, evaluation and development. The competencies apply to all instructors, regardless of content area, instructional platform (campus-based or online) and employment status (full-time, part-time, adjunct). Faculty hired by any CEC institution must demonstrateour academic institutions are evaluated for proficiency in each of the following competencies:

Career Services

Assisting our students in finding employment in their field of study is an important element of our educational mission. To this end, each of our institutions has a career services department whose primary responsibility is to help prepare students to conduct a successful job search and to help identify job opportunities with employers. In addition, our career services staff assists students in identifying employment to assist with financial support while our students pursue their education. Employer relationship development, part-time employment and internship opportunities are important parts of our overall employment success strategy, as they lead to future opportunities for our students and graduates in their chosen profession.

Compliance with Regulations

Specialized staff review, interpret and establish procedures for compliance with regulations governing financial assistance programs and processing financial aid applications. Because financial assistance programs are required to be administered in accordance with the standard of care and diligence of a fiduciary, any regulatory violation can be the basis for disciplinary action, including the initiation of a suspension, limitation or termination proceeding against one or all of our institutions.

All CEC institutions undergo an annual independent compliance audit for all Title IV Programs as well as a variety of other compliance submissions and reviews from ED, the Department of Veteran’s Affairs, various state licensing agencies and institutional accreditors. CEC’s efforts to maintain compliance with all of these regulatory requirements are extensive and include:

8

Seasonality and Fluctuations in Results

Our quarterly net revenues and income may fluctuate primarily as a legal and regulatory group that assists withresult of the development and implementation of procedures and process controls and monitors execution to maintain compliance with federal and state regulations, as well as monitoring of federal and state regulatory developments;

EmployeesHuman Capital

As of December 31, 2017,2021, we had approximately 4,300 employees, of which approximately 1,900 work for CTU and approximately 1,700 work for AIUS, with the remainder being corporate-level employees in areas such as marketing, information technology, financial aid, accounting, human resources, legal and compliance. Our employees include approximately 2,000 part-time adjunct faculty members and approximately 120 full-time faculty members. Other than our part-time adjunct faculty members, we have less than 60 part-time employees, some of which are student employees under the federal work study program.

6

At the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in March of 2020, we transitioned our workforce to a totalremote work environment. The transition to a remote work environment was supported by our scalable and innovative technology infrastructure which enabled us to make these changes with minimal disruptions to our business operations. As a result of 4,462the success of this transition, the Company made the decision during 2021 to allow its employees to continue in a hybrid work environment, which provides employees with the flexibility of working remotely or working from the corporate or campus locations when needed. This hybrid work environment gives employees and their managers the ability to determine what works best for their role in supporting students and business operations.  

The human capital objectives that we focus on reflect the nature of our business, our regulated industry and our guiding principles and strategic priorities discussed above under the heading “Guiding Principles and Strategic Priorities.”  

We focus on achieving results in a compliant and ethical manner. New employees in student-serving functions such as admissions and financial aid participate in multi-week training programs and our compliance monitoring programs and other ongoing compliance efforts in these and other areas are robust. The Compliance and Risk Committee of our Board of Directors regularly reviews the results of our compliance monitoring programs and matters reported through the Company’s internal system for reporting compliance concerns in order to monitor the effectiveness of these programs.

We use technology to support students and enhance learning. Therefore, it is imperative that our employees in student-serving functions are trained to use our technology and systems for the benefit of our students. This includes our faculty members who must be proficient in using our online learning management system, personalized learning technology and mobile applications. We also focus significant human capital resources on protecting our technology infrastructure and the personal information maintained therein regarding applicants, our students, their families and our alumni. The Compliance and Risk Committee and the full Board of Directors regularly review information security matters given their importance to the Company.

Our goal is to deploy resources in the most effective and efficient manner that we believe will lead to increased stockholder value while supporting and enhancing the academic quality of our institutions. This philosophy applies to our human capital resources as well. Significant management attention is focused on where to add human capital and other resources to grow responsibly, while at the same time monitoring human capital costs and promoting operating efficiencies. Employee turnover impacts human capital costs and operating efficiencies and as a result we have in the past seen improved operating results associated with improved tenure within student-serving functions. The Audit Committee of our Board of Directors regularly reviews information about employee turnover within the Company.

We are committed to a policy of equal employment opportunity. We value diversity and strive to create an atmosphere that supports the students and communities that we serve. Inclusivity is important in our approach to achieving a dynamic culture. We are committed to fostering an environment where differences are respected and valued and where employees feel empowered to share their experiences and ideas.The self-identified ethnicity or race of our full-time employees, including 161 students employed on a part-time basis at certainfull-time faculty members, is approximately 51% White, 30% Black or African American, 11% Hispanic, Latinx or Spanish origin, 7% Asian, 0.7% American Indian or Alaskan Native and 0.3% Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and our full-time employees are approximately 38% male and 62% female. The self-identified ethnicity or race of our part-time non-student employees, who are primarily part-time adjunct faculty members, is approximately 67% White, 23% Black or African American, 5% Hispanic, Latinx or Spanish origin, 4% Asian, 0.8% American Indian or Alaskan Native and less than 1% Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and our part-time employees are approximately 50% male and 50% female.  

INDUSTRY BACKGROUND AND COMPETITION

The domestic postsecondary education industry is highly fragmented and competitive, with no one provider having a significant market share. The Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended and reauthorized (“Higher Education Act”), and the related regulations govern all higher education institutions participating in federal student aid and loan programs under Title IV of the Higher Education Act (“Title IV Programs”). According to the National Center for Education Statistics (“NCES”), there were approximately 5,900 postsecondary education institutions eligible for federal student aid in the United States for the academic year 2020-21, including approximately 2,300 for-profit schools; approximately 1,900 public schools which include state universities and community colleges; and approximately 1,700 private non-profit schools. According to the U.S. Department of Education (“ED” or the “Department”), over the 12-month period for academic year 2019-20, approximately 26.1 million students were enrolled in postsecondary institutions.

The domestic postsecondary degree-granting education industry was an approximately $672 billion industry for academic year 2018-19, according to a report published in 2021 by the Department. We compete in this industry primarily with other degree-granting regionally-accredited colleges and universities, both for-profit institutions like ours and public and private non-profit institutions. In particular, there is growing competition from online programs at these institutions as follows:they increase their online offerings in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and growing prospective student interest.

Most postsecondary institutions, regardless of how they are organized, face significant challenges, including:

7

Postsecondary institutions are also subject to significant regulations which provide for a regulatory triad by mandating specific regulatory responsibilities for the accrediting agencies recognized by the Department, the federal government through the Department, and state higher education regulatory bodies.

Extensive and increasingly complex Department regulations governing postsecondary institutions have been enacted, including regulations applicable only to for-profit institutions. These regulations, coupled with the increased focus by the U.S. Congress on the role that for-profit educational institutions play in higher education, as well as the evolving needs and objectives of students and employers, economic constraints affecting educational institutions and increased focus on affordability and value, may cause increased competition across the industry as well as contribute to continued changes in business operating strategies.

Although competition exists, for-profit educators serve a segment of the market for postsecondary education that we believe has not been fully addressed by traditional public and private universities. Public and private non-profit institutions can face limited financial resources to expand their offerings in response to growth or changes in the demand for education, due to a combination of state funding challenges, significant expenditures required for research and the professor tenure system. Institutions may also control student enrollments to preserve the perceived prestige and exclusivity of their degree offerings. For-profit providers of postsecondary education offer prospective students the greater flexibility and convenience of their institutions' programmatic offerings and learning structure and an emphasis on applied content and the use of technology in the delivery of the education. At the same time, the share of the postsecondary education market that has been captured by for-profit providers remains relatively small. As a result, we believe that in spite of regulatory and other challenges facing the industry, for-profit postsecondary education providers continue to have significant opportunities to address the demand for postsecondary education.

The majority of our degree-seeking students today have one or more non-traditional characteristics (e.g., did not enroll immediately after high school graduation, work full-time, are financially independent for purposes of financial aid eligibility, have dependents other than a spouse or are single parents). These non-traditional students typically are looking to improve their skills and enhance their earning potential within the context of their careers or in pursuit of new careers. As the industry has shifted to more students with non-traditional characteristics, an increasing proportion of colleges and universities are addressing the needs of working students. This includes colleges and universities with well-established brand names that were historically focused on traditional students.

ACCREDITATION, STATE REGULATION AND JURISDICTIONAL AUTHORIZATIONSOTHER COMPLIANCE MATTERS

Institutional Accreditation

In the United States, accreditation is a process through which an institution subjects itself to qualitative review by an organization of peer institutions. Accrediting agencies primarily examine the academic quality of the instructional programs of an institution, and a grant of accreditation is generally viewed as confirmation that an institution’s programs meet generally accepted academic standards. Accrediting agencies also review the administrative and financial operations of the institutions they accredit to ensure that each institution has the resources to meet its educational mission.

Pursuant to provisions of the Higher Education Act, EDthe Department relies on accrediting agencies to determine whether institutions’ educational programs qualify the institutions to participate in Title IV Programs. The Higher Education Act and its implementing regulations specify certain standards that all recognized accrediting agencies must adopt in connection with their review of postsecondary institutions.

Institutions in our University GroupBoth CTU and AIUS are accredited by Thethe Higher Learning Commission (“HLC”) (www.hlcommission.org). AIU’s next re-affirmation of accreditation, an institutional accrediting agency that is scheduled for 2023-24, with its next comprehensive evaluation in May 2018.recognized by the Department. CTU’s next re-affirmation of accreditation is scheduled for 2022-23.2023. CTU had a comprehensive evaluation in 2017, during which HLC found that CTU continued to meet HLC’s criteria offor accreditation, while requesting that CTU complete some interim reporting prior to its next re-affirmation of accreditation reviewreview. CTU has submitted all requested interim reports. AIUS’ next re-affirmation of accreditation is scheduled for 2024. AIUS had a comprehensive evaluation in 2022-23.

Our remaining teach-out campuses are also institutionally accredited through their expected closure date. Briarcliffe College is accredited by the Middle States Commission on Higher Education, Harrington College of Design is accredited by the Higher Learning Commission and Sanford-Brown Colleges in Seattle and Online are accredited by the Accrediting Council of Independent Colleges and Schools (“ACICS”).

In order to participate in Title IV Programs, an institution must be accredited by an accrediting agency recognized by ED. All accrediting agencies2018, during which HLC found that are recognized by ED are subject to periodic review by ED, at which time ED determines whether the agency continuesAIUS continued to meet ED’s recognition criteria. In 2016, ED did not renew its recognitionHLC’s criteria for ACICS and ED subsequently issued a provisional program participation agreement for the two teach-out campuses that expires on June 12, 2018 (or on their earlier closureaccreditation.

9

date). The provisional program participation agreement includes an addendum that outlines the terms and conditions under which the institution can remain eligible to participate in Title IV Programs during the provisional program participation period. These remaining ACICS-accredited campuses are in teach-outs that are expected to be complete prior to June 12, 2018. Therefore, we have not sought other institutional accreditation for them. These campuses are abiding by the additional terms of the provisional program participation agreement in order to retain Title IV Program eligibility as well as the ACICS criteria to satisfy certain state licensing requirements during this transitional period. To date, state licensing agencies have provided institutions with the ability to retain their licensure despite the fact that ACICS is no longer recognized by ED. We continue to keep these agencies informed throughout this process.

Programmatic Accreditation

In addition to the institutional accreditationsaccreditation described above, the institutions in our University GroupCTU and AIUS have specialized programmatic accreditation for particular educational programs. Many states and professional associations require professional programs to be accredited at a program level, and require individuals who must passsit for professional license exams to have graduated from accredited programs. Programmatic accreditation does not satisfy EDthe Department requirements to confer Title IV Program eligibility; however, it does provide additional academic quality review by peers in a given field and may enable or assist graduates to practice, sit for licensing or

8

certification exams (in some cases) or otherwise secure appropriate employment in their chosen field. In addition to programmatic accreditation, some states have licensing boards which regulate who in a state is licensed to practice in a given profession.

Our schoolsuniversities pursue programmatic accreditation if saidthat accreditation is required by employers or licensing bodies in order for a graduate to practice the profession or if it is required in order for a graduate to sit for a licensing or certification exam in order to practice or advance in the profession. In somemost cases, programmatic accreditation is sought because it is desired by employers and may enhance the ability of our graduates to compete for employment in their field.

Programmatic accreditation has been granted by the following accrediting agencies for the following individual programsdegree program areas offered by our University Group institutions.

Programmatic Accreditation Table ⁽¹⁾

_____________________

State AuthorizationRegulation

State licensingapproval agencies are responsible for the oversight of educational institutions, and continued approval by such agencies is necessary for an institution to operate and grant degrees diplomas or certificates to its students. State laws establish standards for, among other things, student instruction, qualifications of faculty, location and nature of facilities, and financial policies. State laws and regulations may limit our campuses’ ability to operate or to award degrees or diplomascertificates or offer new degree programs. Moreover, under the Higher Education Act and Department regulations, approval by such agencies is necessary to maintain eligibility to participate in Title IV Programs. As a result, we are subject to regulation in the states where our physical campuses or administrative offices are located. Currently, each of our ground-based campuses is authorized by the state in which it is located. Additionally, our online institutions have sought confirmation of an exemption, separate state approval or recognition from the relevant state agency via participation in a consortia program called the State Authorization Reciprocity Agreement (“SARA”) in the states in which they enroll and/or recruit students. California is the only state which is not a part of SARA; however, CTU and AIUS hold the appropriate approval in that state.

SARA is an agreement among member states, districts and U.S. territories that establishes comparable national standards for interstate offering of postsecondary distance education courses and programs. States, districts and territories apply to become members

10

of SARA (which, in many cases, requires action by state legislators) and if accepted, institutions approved in their “home” state may apply to become participants in the SARA compact and the “home” state authorization is deemed acceptable to operate an online program in other states that also participate in SARA as long as they do not establish a “physical presence” in those other states (as defined by SARA). As of January 1, 2018, 48Forty-nine states plus the District of Columbia are SARA participants (www.nc-sara.org)(www.nc-sara.org). AIUCTU and CTUAIUS are approved to participate in SARA by their home states (Illinois(Colorado and Colorado,Arizona, respectively). For those states

In addition to state education regulations, there are other state agencies that have not adoptedoversee regulations related to student financing, payment servicing and general consumer protection. In some cases, state laws and regulations require us to participate in SARA, local rules and thresholdsregister the volume of payment plans our students enter into and/or require licenses for licensure apply.

ED recently published new regulations, to be effective July 1, 2018, that condition Title IV Program eligibility on confirmation that an institution has the appropriate state approvals from any state which requiresour institutions to obtain its approval. The new regulations recognize SARA participation as a means to qualify in a state through reciprocity, which alleviates most ofcollect student payments for the impact.educational services they deliver.

Additional State RegulatoryOther Compliance Matters

In recent years, states and federal agencies have increased their focus on the private,for-profit, postsecondary education sector. This includes increased activity by state attorneys general and the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) in their review of the sector.

9

In this regard, on January 3, 2019, the Company entered into agreements with attorneys general from 48 states and the District of Columbia to bring closure to multi-state inquiries ongoing since January 2014. As part of the agreements, the Company expressly denied any allegations of wrongdoing but agreed to, among other things, work with a third-party administrator that will report annually for three years on the Company’s compliance with various obligations the Company committed to in the agreements. Operationally, the Company committed to:

From a compliance standpoint, the Company committed to:

Generally, the operational aspects we agreed to as part of the agreements with the attorneys general are for a six-year period. With respect to working with a third-party administrator, the Company voluntarily agreed to extend the engagement for an additional year beyond the initial three year period to enable the administrator to continue its review of the Company’s compliance program enhancements adopted over the initial period. Further, on July 26, 2019, the Company executed a settlement agreement with the FTC to resolve an inquiry commenced by the FTC in 2015. While not admitting any wrongdoing, the Company chose to settle the FTC inquiry after almost four years of legal expenses and cooperating with the FTC’s investigation. Under the terms of the agreement with the FTC, the Company agreed to continue its compliance with the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Telemarketing and Consumer Fraud and Abuse Prevention Act, including compliance with the national do not call registry. The Company agreed to enhance its current operational and compliance processes with respect to prospective student expressions of interest, or “leads,” purchased from third party lead aggregators and generators and implement other agreed-upon compliance measures. Specifically, the agreement with the FTC requires the operation of a system to monitor third party lead aggregators and generators involving a compliance review by, or on behalf of, the Company of the various sources a prospective student interacts with prior to the Company’s purchase and use of the prospective student lead. In addition, the FTC Agreement contains requirements regarding employee and lead aggregator acknowledgements of the agreement, compliance certifications and record creation and maintenance. The principal provisions of the agreement with the FTC will remain in effect for twenty years. 

These agreements and an earlier agreement with the New York Attorney General have several pending inquiries byled to periodic requests for information to demonstrate continued compliance with the agreements and applicable regulations. Compiling data and other information in response to these and other requests from various state and federal agencies is costly and time consuming and any resulting claim of noncompliance may harm our reputation and business.  

See Item 1A, “Risk Factors – Risks Related to the Highly Regulated Field in Which We Operate – Our agreements with multiple state attorneys general. See Note 11 “Contingencies – State Investigations”general and the FTC may lead to unexpected impacts on our consolidated financial statements student enrollments or higher than anticipated expenses, a failure to comply may lead to additional enforcement actions and continued scrutiny may result in additional costs or new enforcement actions,” for more information about these inquiries.

Additionally, on August 19, 2013, the Company entered into an Assurance of Discontinuance with the New York Attorney General. Under the terms of this agreement, without admitting or denying any findings by the New York Attorney General, the Company agreed to, among other things: calculate and disclose placement rates according to agreed upon procedures and retain an independent consultant or audit firm to independently verify and report on such placement rates and to teach out programs going forward that do not achieve a 47.5% minimum placement rate. The Company’s remaining teach-out campus in New York as well as AIU Online and CTU Online have each reported and published this additional agreed upon placement rate which, in the case of AIU Online and CTU Online, only includes New York resident graduates. For the 2017 reporting year, none of the rates required to be calculated for AIU Online and CTU Online were below the minimum threshold required by the Assurance of Discontinuance. The Company’s remaining campus in New York is in teach-out and therefore no further action should be necessary with respect to programs which report rates below the minimum threshold.agreements.

STUDENT FINANCIAL AID AND RELATED FEDERAL REGULATION

ManyA majority of our students require assistance in financing their education. Our institutions are approved to participate in the U.S. Department of Education’s Title IV federal aid programs. Our institutions also participate in a number of state financial aid programs, tuition assistance programs of the United States Armed Forces and education benefits administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs and other alternative funding sources.(“VA”). Our institutions that participate in federal and state financial aid programs are subject to extensive and frequently changing regulatory requirements imposed by federal and state government agencies, and other standards imposed by educational accrediting bodies.

10

Nature of Federal Support for Postsecondary Education in the United States

The U.S. government provides a substantial portion of its support for postsecondary education in the form of Title IV Program grants, loans and work-study programs to students who can use those funds to finance certain education related expenses at any institution that has been approved to participate by ED.the Department. These federal programs are authorized by the Higher Education Act. While most students are eligible for a Title IV loan, more generally,typically, financial aid administered under Title IV is awarded on the basis of financial need, which is generally defined under the Higher Education Act as the difference between the costs associated with attending an institution and the amount a student’s family can reasonably be expected to contribute based on a federally determined formula. Among other things, 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.

Students at our institutions may receive grants, loans and work-study opportunities to fund their education under the Title IV Programs described in the sections below. In addition, some students at our institutions receive education related benefits pursuant to certain programs for veterans and military personnel, the most significant of which are described further below.

Federal Student and Parent Loans

ED’sThe Department’s major form of aid includes loans to students and parents through the William D. Ford Federal Direct Loan (“(“Direct Loan”) Program. Direct Loans are loans made directly by the U.S. Government to students or their parents. The Direct Loan program offers Federal Direct Stafford, Federal Direct PLUS (which provides loans to parents of dependent students and to graduate or professional students, known as Parent PLUS and Grad PLUS)PLUS) and Federal Direct Consolidation Loans.

Undergraduate students who have demonstrated financial need may be eligible to receive a Direct Subsidized Loan, with EDthe Department paying the interest on this loan while the student is enrolled at least half-time in school. Graduate and undergraduate students who do not demonstrate financial need may be eligible to receive a Direct Unsubsidized Loan. Graduate/professional students may only receive Direct Unsubsidized Loans. With Direct Unsubsidized Loans the student is responsible for the interest while in school and

11

after leaving school, although actual interest payments generally may be deferred by the student until after he or she has left school. Students who are eligible for a Direct Subsidized Loan may also be eligible to receive a Direct Unsubsidized Loan.

A student is not required to meet any specific credit scoring criteria to receive a Direct Loan, but any student with a default on a prior loan made under any Title IV Program or who has been convicted under federal or state law of selling or possessing drugs while receiving federal aid may not be eligible. EDThe Department has established maximum annual and aggregate borrowing limits for Direct Loans.

The Direct PLUS Loan Program provides loans to either the parents of dependent students (Direct Parent PLUS) or to graduate students (Direct Grad PLUS).students. Parents and graduate students who have an acceptable credit history may borrow a Direct PLUS Loan to pay the education related expenses of a child who is a dependent (Direct Parent PLUS) or a graduate student (Direct Grad PLUS) enrolled at least half-time at our eligible institutions. The amount of a Direct PLUS Loan cannot exceed the student’s cost of attendance less all other financial aid received.

Federal Pell Grant and Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grant

Title IV Program grants are generally made to our students under the Federal Pell Grant (“(“Pell Grant”) program and the Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grant (“FSEOG”) program. The 2017-182021-22 maximum annual Pell Grant is $5,920,$6,495, excluding any additional amount awarded pursuant to a year-round Pell Grant. Beginning with the 2017-18 award year, eligible students may receive year-round Pell Grant funds. A year-round Pell Grant program allows students to receive up to 150% of the student’s regular grant award, over the course of the academic year, allowing students to maintain their enrollment status and receive Pell Grant funds for the entire calendarup to two additional academic terms during an award year so that they can continue taking classes and work toward graduating more quickly. To be eligible for the additional Pell Grant funds, the student must be enrolled at least half-time in the payment period(s) for which the student receives the additional Pell Grant funds in excess of 100% of the student’s regular Pell Grant award.

The FSEOG program awards are designed to supplement Pell Grants up to a maximum amount of $4,000 per academic year for the neediest students. Our institutions are required to provide matching funding for FSEOG awards that represent not less than 25% of the total FSEOG award to be received by eligible students. The matching may be accomplished through institutional, private and/or state funds.

Federal Work-Study Program

Generally, under the federal work-study program, federal funds are used to pay 75% of the cost of part-time employment of eligible students to perform work for the institution or certain off-campus organizations. The remaining 25% is paid by the institution or the student’s employer. In select cases, these federal funds under the federal work-study program are used to pay up to 100% of the cost of part-time employment of eligible students.

Veterans Benefits Programs

Some of our students who are veterans use their benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill or the Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act of 2008, as amended (“(“Post-9/11 GI Bill”), to cover their tuition. A certain number of our students are also eligible to receive funds from other education assistance programs administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs.VA.

11

The Yellow Ribbon program under the Post-9/11 GI Bill expanded education benefits for veterans who have served on active duty on or after September 11, 2001, including reservists and members of the National Guard. As originally passed, the Post-9/11 GI Bill provided that eligible veterans could receive benefits for tuition purposes up to the cost of in-state tuition at the most expensive public institution of higher education in the state where the veteran was enrolled. In addition, veterans who were enrolled in classroom-based programs or “blended programs” (programs that combine classroom learning and distance learning) could receive monthly housing stipends, while veterans enrolled in wholly distance-based programs were not entitled to a monthly housing stipend. The provisions regarding education benefits for post-9/11 veterans took effect August 1, 2009. The Post-9/11 GI Bill also increased the amount of education benefits available to eligible veterans under the pre-existing Montgomery GI Bill. The legislation also authorized expansion of service members’ ability to transfer veterans’ education benefits to family members.

On January 4, 2011, the Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Improvements Act of 2010 (“(“Improvements Act”) was adopted, which amends the Post-9/11 GI Bill in several respects. The Improvements Act alters the way benefits related to tuition and fees are calculated. For nonpublic U.S. institutions, the Improvements Act bases the benefits related to tuition and fees on the net cost to the student (after accounting for state and federal aid, scholarships, institutional aid, fee waivers, and similar assistance paid directly to the institution for the sole purpose of defraying tuition cost) rather than the charges established by the institution. The Improvements Act also replaced the state-dependent benefit cap with a single national cap which is adjusted annually and as of August 1, 20172021 is $22,805.$26,042. In addition, veterans pursuing a program of education solely through distance learning on a more than half-time basis are eligible to receive up to 50% of the national average of the basic housing allowance available to service members who are at military pay grade E-5 and have dependents. Most “Improvements Act” changes took effect on August 1 or October 1, 2011, though changes to rules regarding eligibility for benefits were effective immediately or retroactively to the effective date of the Post-9/11 GI Bill. The Improvements Act did not change the Post-9/11 GI Bill’s provision that allows veterans to receive up to $1,000 per academic year for books, supplies, equipment and other education costs.

12

U.S. Military Tuition Assistance

Service members of the United States Armed Forces are eligible to receive tuition assistance from their branch of service through the Uniform Tuition Assistance Program of the Department of Defense (“DoD”). Service members may use this tuition assistance to pursue postsecondary degrees at postsecondary institutions that are accredited by accrediting agencies that are recognized by ED.the Department. Each branch of the armed forces has established its own rules for the tuition assistance programs of DoD.

In 2010, both the U.S. Congress and DoD increased their focus on DoD tuition assistance that is used for distance education and programs at for-profit institutions. The DoD Voluntary Education Partnership Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) was established as part of the revised DoD Instruction 1322.25, Voluntary Education Programs dated March 15, 2011. The DoD updated the MOU increases oversight of educational programs offeredin 2014 and 2019, in each case with enhanced requirements for institutions. The MOU requires that participating institutions provide meaningful information to active dutystudents about the financial cost and attendance at an institution so military students can make informed decisions on where to attend school, will not use unfair, deceptive, and abusive recruiting practices and will provide academic and student support services to service members and their families. It contains requirements regarding the disclosures of costs and amounts covered by federal educational benefits, marketing standards, state authorization, accreditation approvals, standard institutional refund policies, educational plans and academic and financial advising. The MOU also incorporates the development and implementation of the “VA Shopping Sheet,” a standardized cost form with federal aid information which has evolved into what is now referred to by ED as the “College Financing Plan”. The MOU conveys the commitments and agreements between the educational institution and DoD prior to accepting funds under the tuition assistance program. For example, the MOU requires an institution to agree to support DoD regulatory guidance, adhere to a bill of rights that is specified in the regulations, and participate in the proposed Military Voluntary Education Review program. Under the MOU, institutions must also agree to adhere to the principles and criteria established by the Service Members Opportunity Colleges Degree Network System regarding the transferability of credit and the awarding of credit for military training and experience. Both AIUCTU and CTUAIUS have signed this earlier versioneach of the DoD’s standard MOU.

InMOUs, including the most recent in August 2013, DoD began incorporating the Principles of Excellence outlined in the President’s 2012 Executive Order into their current MOU. Refer to the section below for more information on the Principles of Excellence.

In May 2014, DoD released a final version of its revised MOU and its changes include efforts to enhance departmental oversight of voluntary education programs as well as incorporate the remaining requirements as stated in the President's Executive Order 13607. The new provisions apply to all educational institutions providing education programs2019 which is effective through the DoD tuition assistance program. Among other things, the MOU requests that participating institutions provide meaningful information to students about the financial cost and attendance at an institution so military students can make informed decisions on where to attend school, will not use unfair, deceptive, and abusive recruiting practices and will provide academic and student support services to service members and their families. The revised MOU also implemented rules to strengthen existing procedures for access to DoD installations by educational institutions, a DoD postsecondary education complaint system for service members, spouses, and adult family members to register student complaints and established authorization for the military departments to establish service-specific tuition assistance eligibility criteria and management controls. In September 2014, both AIU and CTU signed DoD’s revised MOU.

2012 Executive Order Regarding Military and Veterans Education Benefits

On April 27, 2012, the President issued an executive order regarding the establishment of Principles of Excellence for educational institutions receiving funding from federal military and veterans educational benefits programs, including those provided by the Post-9/11 GI Bill and Uniform Tuition Assistance Program of the DoD. The executive order requires DoD, the Department of Veterans Affairs and ED to establish and implement “Principles of Excellence” to apply to educational institutions receiving such funding. The goals of the Principles are broadly stated in the order and relate to disclosures of costs and amounts of costs covered by federal educational benefits, marketing standards, state authorization, accreditation approvals, standard institutional refund policies, educational plans and academic and financial advising. Various implementation mechanisms are included, along with the development and implementation of the “VA Shopping Sheet,” a standardized cost form with federal aid information. While additional administrative support has been required to comply with the executive order, the overall impact to the Company has not been material.2024.

Institutional Payment Plans

Some of our students will enter into institutional payment plans with our institutions to pay either all, or more commonly, a portion, or occasionally all, of their institutional charges directly to the school. This is more commonmay occur for students who have a gap between their Title IV financial aid funding and other third party aid available to them and the institutional charges.charges or for students who are enrolled in programs or courses for which Title IV or other financial aid is not offered. We offer these payment plans over the in-school period, and up to 12 months beyond graduation. The payment plans do not include any interest or fees.charge interest.

Eligibility and Certification by EDthe Department

Under the provisions of the Higher Education Act, an institution must apply to EDthe Department for continued certification to participate in Title IV Programs at least every six years or when it undergoes a change of control. In addition, an institution must obtain EDthe Department approval for certain substantial changes in its operations, including changes in an institution’s accrediting agency or state authorizing agency or changes to an institution’s structure or certain basic educational features.

12

Institutions approved to participate in Title IV Programs sign a program participation agreement provided by EDthe Department that describes the terms of participation and includes a number of certifications and assurances made by the chief executive officer.head of the institutions. As long as an institution has submitted an application for re-certification prior to the expiration of its current program participation agreement, the institution’s eligibility to participate in Title IV Programs continues on a month-to-month basis until EDthe Department completes its review. EDThe Department may issue full certification to an institution, it may deny certification or it may elect to issue provisional certification, in which case the program participation agreement outlines additional requirements that the institution must meet.

13

EDThe Department may place an institution on provisional certification status if it finds that the institution does not fully satisfy all required eligibility and certification standards. Provisional certification does not generally limit an institution’s access to Title IV Program funds. ED may withdraw an institution’s provisional certification without advance notice if ED determines that the institution is not fulfilling all material requirements.

All of our institutions are currently operating on a provisional program participation agreement. AIU and CTU each have a program participation agreement that expires on September 30, 2018, and will therefore submit recertification applications by June 30, 2018, which will be subject to ED review and approval. Our remaining institutions are in teach-out and we intend to take any actions needed to maintain their provisional certification through their respective closure dates. During the period of provisional certification, our institutionsan institution must obtain prior EDDepartment approval to add an educational program, open a new location or make any other significant change. Provisional certification does not generally limit an institution’s access to Title IV Program funds. The Department may withdraw an institution’s provisional certification without advance notice if the Department determines that the institution is not fulfilling all material requirements.

In May 2019, both CTU and AIUS (then known as AIU)received renewals of their program participation agreements through March 31, 2021. CTU was removed from provisional certification, while AIUS remains on provisional certification due to open regulatory review processes with the Department at the time of the renewal. Following the Trident acquisition and AIU’s implementation of a university system model, institutional accreditation and approval by the Department continues at the system level.

CTU and AIUS each submitted its application for recertification to continue participation in Title IV Programs on December 21, 2020 and await completion of the Department’s review.  

In connection with its administration of Title IV Programs, the Department has broad powers to request information and review records of a participating institution. The Company is in the process of responding to an extensive request for information received from the Department in December 2021 relating to CTU and AIUS. Significant resources are required to respond to this request and the Department’s review of the information provided could lead to additional requests for information or claims of noncompliance with the extensive regulatory requirements relating to the administration of Title IV Programs.

See Item 1A, “Risk Factors – Risks Related to the Highly Regulated Field in Which We Operate – Compliance with the extensive regulatory requirements applicable to our business can be costly and time consuming, and failure to comply could result in financial penalties, restrictions on our operations, loss of federal and state financial aid funding for our students, or loss of our authorization to operate our institutions” and “– If EDthe Department denies, or significantly conditions, recertification of anyeither of our institutions to participate in Title IV Programs, that institution could not conduct its business as it is currently conducted,” and other risk factors in Item 1A for additional information about the risks surrounding continued participation in Title IV Programs.

Scrutiny of the For-Profit Postsecondary Education Sector

In recent years, Congress, ED,the Department, states, accrediting agencies, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”), the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”),FTC, state attorneys general and the media have scrutinized the for-profit postsecondary education sector. Congressional hearings and roundtable discussions were held regarding various aspects of the education industry, including issues surrounding student debt as well as publicly reported student outcomes that may be used as part of an institution’s recruiting and admissions practices, and reports were issued that are highly critical of for-profit colleges and universities. A group of influential U.S. senators, consumer advocacy groups and some media outlets have strongly and repeatedly encouraged ED, the Department, of DefenseDoD and the Department of Veterans AffairsVA and its state approving agencies to take action to limit or terminate the participation of institutions such as ours in existing tuition assistance programs. In addition, targeted loan relief to student borrowers is a stated priority for the Department, and consumer advocacy groups and others are focusing their lobbying and other efforts relating to student debt forgiveness on for-profit colleges and universities, encouraging loan discharge applications and complaints by former students.

The current Presidential and Department administrations, as well as Congress, are pursuing significant legislative, regulatory and administrative actions that will affect our business. For example, as discussed below, new legislation changing the 90-10 Rule passed in 2021, and numerous existing or former regulations are being modified or reproposed for future adoption by the Department. Any actions that limit our participation in Title IV Programs or the amount of student financial aid for which our students are eligible would negativelymaterially impact our business.student enrollments and profitability and could impact the continued viability of our business as currently conducted. See Item 1A, “Risk Factors – Risks Related to the Highly Regulated Field in Which We Operate.”

Legislative Action and Recent EDDepartment Regulatory Initiatives

The U.S. Congress must periodically reauthorize the Higher Education Act and other laws governing Title IV Programs and annually determines the funding level for each Title IV Program.

The Higher Education Opportunity Act (“HEOA”) was the most recent reauthorization of the Higher Education Act and was signed into law on August 14, 2008. It was immediately effective for many items with others effective in subsequent years. The HEOA authorized increases in the Federal Pell Grants, changed certain grant eligibility requirements, expanded Stafford Loan

13

deferment options, provided changes to needs analysis, changed treatment of Veterans Administration benefits effective with the 2010-11 award year and revised many of the regulations governing an institution’s eligibility to participate in Title IV Programs.

Historically, Congress has reauthorized the Higher Education Act every five to six years. TheHowever, the last full reauthorization took place in 2008 and Congress has subsequently taken several actions whichthat effectively extend the Higher Education Act and various Title IV Programs on a temporary basis. We anticipate that Congress willcould work to either reauthorize the Higher Education Act in its entirety, or pass a series of smaller bills that focus on individual parts of the Higher Education Act, primarily Title IV Programs. CertainPrograms, or continue to extend existing Title IV Programs for more limited terms while continuing debate on broader policy objectives. Additionally, legislative changes impacting Title IV Programs is included in broader legislation from time to time. For example, certain legislation has been introducedpassed that is focused on simplifying both access to and repayment of Title IV funds. While it is uncertain whether those proposals will be enacted into law, simplifying the federal student aid programs and reducing the complexity of repaymentfunds, which should be of benefit to our students. However, scrutinyAdditionally, on March 11, 2021, President Biden signed a multi-faceted legislative package that includes new economic stimulus measures broadly targeting various aspects of the U.S. economy. Congress included in this legislation a modification to the “90-10 Rule” applicable to for-profit institutions that alters the measurement under the rule from the percentage of Title IV Program tuition revenue an institution receives to the percentage of “federal educational assistance” an institution receives. While the required ratio to maintain Title IV Program eligibility will remain at below 90%, specific details on the modified rule and what constitutes “federal educational assistance” are expected to be determined pursuant to negotiated rulemaking (see “Negotiated Rulemaking 2022: Institutional and Programmatic Eligibility” below). The legislation specifies that the earliest the modified rule may apply is for institutional fiscal years beginning on or after January 1, 2023, and effectiveness for 2023 generally requires that final regulations be published prior to November 1, 2022. See the “Compliance with Federal Regulatory Standards and Effect of Federal Regulatory Violations” section below for information about the 90-10 Rule and Item 1A, “Risk Factors – Risks Related to the Highly Regulated Field in Which We Operate – Our institutions could lose their eligibility to participate in federal student financial aid programs or have other limitations placed upon them if the percentage of their revenues derived from those programs is too high,” for information regarding risks relating to the 90-10 Rule and this pending rulemaking.

Scrutiny of the for-profit postsecondary education sector and the ongoing policy differences in Congress regarding spending levels could lead to significant regulatory changes in connection with the upcoming reauthorization of the Higher Education Act, and many of these changes may be adverse to postsecondary institutions generally or for-profit institutions specifically. See Item 1A, “Risk Factors – Risks Related to the Highly Regulated Field in Which We Operate – CongressThe extensive regulatory requirements applicable to our business may revise laws governing Title IV Programs or reduce funding for those programschange, in particular as a result of the scrutiny of the for-profit postsecondary education sector and the results of the 2020 Presidential and Congressional elections, which could require us to make substantial changes to our business, reduce our enrollmentprofitability and revenue and increase costs of operations.make compliance more difficult.”

In recent years, ED has engagedThe Department regularly engages in significant rulemaking efforts intended to develop new regulations focused on various topics. These efforts ledRecent rulemaking initiatives focused on state authorization, distance learning, accreditation, educational innovation and other matters. In addition to Department initiatives, recent federal legislation was passed which is designed to help streamline the financial aid application process for students and to provide assistance to students as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic.  

Two additional regulatory initiatives by the Department of significance have occurred in recent years. First is the adoption of the new gainful employment regulation and “borrower defense to repayment” regulations.regulations in 2019. See the “Compliance with Federal Regulatory Standards and Effect of Federal Regulatory Violations” section below for a description of these regulations as they were adopted. On June 14, 2017, ED announced its intentionregulations. Further changes to convene new negotiated rulemaking committees to consider modifications to thesethe borrower defense to repayment regulations as well asare being considered (see “Negotiated Rulemaking 2021: Affordability and Student Loans” below).

Second, the Department’s rulemaking efforts in 2019 resulted in the rescission of previously adopted “gainful employment” regulations. Perdoceo’s institutions, and most other for-profit institutions, qualify for Title IV Program participation on the basis that they offer programs that, in addition to meeting other requirements, “prepare students for gainful employment regulation. Committee negotiations commenced in late 2017. ED hasa recognized occupation.” During 2013, the Department established negotiated rulemaking committees, one specifically designed to limit Title IV availability for programs at for-profit institutions by defining gainful employment in a recognized occupation. On October 30, 2014, the Department published a new complex final regulation, effective July 1, 2015, to define “gainful employment” as meeting certain standards measuring the general amount students borrow for enrollment in a program against an amount of their reported earnings. Prior to this rulemaking, the term gainful employment had been used in the Higher Education Act for forty years, and had not establishedbeen further defined by Congress or the Department. Through negotiated rulemaking sessions, the Department considered different options for adopting a uniform set of requirements that could be applicable to all schools and not specifically targeted at for-profit institutions. After a public comment period on its proposal, the Department published a final schedule for publication of proposed or final regulations; however, any regulations published in final form by November 1, 2018 typically would take effectregulation on July 1, 2019.2019 to rescind the 2015 gainful employment regulation effective on July 1, 2020. In lieu of the complex gainful employment regulation designed to eliminate program eligibility, the Department continued to update the college scorecards it developed, which apply to all Title IV eligible institutions, with relevant information for prospective students. While the eligibility tests and disclosures associated with the 2015 gainful employment regulation are no longer required, the term “gainful employment” continues to exist in the Higher Education Act and CTU’s and AIUS’ Title IV eligible programs will continue to need to be career focused educational programs. The outcomeDepartment has begun the process of re-adopting a new version of this regulation as part of its 2022 negotiated rulemaking covering institutional and programmatic eligibility (see “Negotiated Rulemaking 2022: Institutional and Programmatic Eligibility” below). Initial discussions as part of the negotiated rulemakings have considered adoption of program eligibility rules that, like the 2015 gainful employment regulation, would measure student debt at a program level against a measure of earnings. However, these discussions have also

14

included various potential adjustments that may cause programs that passed the eligibility test under the 2015 gainful employment regulation to lose Title IV Program eligibility under the new regulation. We are closely monitoring the negotiated rulemaking initiatives andprocess but are unable to determine the potential impact of any final regulations on our business at this time. See Item 1A, “Risk Factors – Risks Related to the Highly Regulated Field in Which We Operate – The extensive regulatory requirements applicable to our business may change, in particular as a result of the scrutiny of the for-profit postsecondary education sector and the results of the 2020 Presidential and Congressional elections, which could require us to make substantial changes to our business, reduce our profitability and make compliance more difficult,” for information about the potential impact of new regulations on our business.

Negotiated Rulemaking 2021: Affordability and Student Loans

In December 2021, the Department concluded negotiated rulemaking on a number of topics related to affordability and student loans. Pursuant to the negotiated rulemaking process, the Department, through a series of three, weeklong meetings in each of October, November and December, worked to develop a notice of proposed rulemaking with representatives of the parties who would be affected significantly by the regulations. If a rulemaking committee is able to reach a consensus on its area, then the agreed upon proposal is submitted for public comment as the proposed regulation, and the final regulation typically aligns closely with the agreed upon proposal. During this rulemaking process, the Department sought the committee’s consensus on an issue-by-issue basis, rather than for all the topics included for the committee’s consideration as a whole. The collection of topics discussed during these negotiations generally relate to different Title IV regulations that impact a student’s ability to reduce or modifiedavoid repaying their student loans. During the process, the Department expressed a goal of making it easier for students to have their loans discharged or forgiven and providing more favorable loan repayment terms. The Department also intends to make it easier to seek recovery of discharged loan funds from institutions through modifications to existing adjudication processes and standards of proof. These goals were shared by many of the committee participants.

Negotiators reached consensus on four of 12 topics that were open for discussion:

Negotiators failed to come to agreement on the remaining topics:

With negotiations completed, the next step in the rulemaking process is for the Department to draft and publish proposed regulations on these topics for public comment. On the four areas where negotiators reached consensus, the Department is obligated to use the consensus language in the regulatory text it publishes for comment. On the areas where consensus was not reached, the Department is free to draft language as it sees fit. The proposed rules may reduce the obligations on students applying for loan discharge and increase the burdens on institutions that provide documentation regarding student claims.After the public notice and comment period, if final regulations are uncertainpublished prior to November 1, 2022, the regulations would generally become effective July 1, 2023. We are closely monitoring the negotiated rulemaking process but are unable to determine the potential impact of any final regulations on our business at this time. See Item 1A, “Risk Factors – Risks Related to the Highly Regulated Field in Which We Operate – The extensive regulatory requirements applicable to our business may change, in particular as a result of the scrutiny of the for-profit postsecondary education sector and the results of the 2020 Presidential and Congressional elections, which could require us to make substantial changes to our business, reduce our profitability and make compliance more difficult,” for information about the potential impact of new regulations on our business.  

14Negotiated Rulemaking 2022: Institutional and Programmatic Eligibility

On October 4, 2021, the Department announced its intent to establish another negotiated rulemaking committee to develop proposed regulations related to institutional and programmatic eligibility. Negotiating sessions of the institutional and programmatic eligibility negotiated rulemaking committee were held in January and February 2022, with a third session scheduled in March 2022. As part of the negotiating sessions, the Department provided issue papers that revealed its intent to impose a number of additional obligations for schools and programs to remain eligible for Title IV funds. The following topics are included as part of this negotiated rulemaking process:

15

In each of the topics currently being negotiated, the Department is proposing rules that impose additional burdens on schools, and often the proposals being discussed apply to schools unevenly. For example, the “90-10” Rule is an additional annual eligibility test requirement that applies exclusively to for-profit sector schools, but only one negotiator represents the for-profit sector. The gainful employment rule is designed to primarily impose additional requirements on for-profit sector programs and many of the proposed modifications to other long standing existing rules contain new requirements that relate exclusively to for-profit sector schools and their ownership structures. In the case of the “90-10” Rule, the Department provided limited information on how it intends to define “federal educational assistance” and instead proposed a number of changes designed to reduce the amount of favorable tuition revenue a school could include to pass. In the case of gainful employment, the Department is proposing a number of modifications that make the test more difficult to pass and eliminate opportunities for programs to make improvements.

The previously adopted and rescinded gainful employment regulation is discussed above in this “Legislative Action and Recent Department Regulatory Initiatives” section, and please see the “Compliance with Federal Regulatory Standards and Effect of Federal Regulatory Violations” section below for an overview of the current rules relating to “90-10,” change of ownership or control, financial responsibility and administrative capability.

Following the completion of the negotiation sessions, the Department intends to publish its proposed regulations for public comment. Publication of final regulations in the Federal Register must occur on or before November 1 for the regulations to be effective for the next federal student financial aid award year, which begins July 1 of the following year. Negotiated rulemaking committees convened in recent years generally have not reached consensus, resulting in the Department having significant latitude in formulating regulations. We are closely monitoring the negotiated rulemaking process but are unable to determine the potential impact of any final regulations on our business at this time. See Item 1A, “Risk Factors – Risks Related to the Highly Regulated Field in Which We Operate – The extensive regulatory requirements applicable to our business may change, in particular as a result of the scrutiny of the for-profit postsecondary education sector and the results of the 2020 Presidential and Congressional elections, which could require us to make substantial changes to our business, reduce our profitability and make compliance more difficult,” for information about the potential impact of new regulations on our business.

Compliance with Federal Regulatory Standards and Effect of Federal Regulatory Violations

To be eligible to participate in Title IV Programs, an institution must comply with the Higher Education Act and regulations thereunder that are administered by ED.the Department. We and our institutions are regularly subject to audits and compliance reviews and periodically subject to inquiries, lawsuits, investigations, and/or claims of non-compliance and lawsuits by ED andfrom federal and state regulatory agencies, accrediting agencies, the Department, present and former students and employees, and others that may allege violations of statutes, regulations, accreditation standards or other regulatory requirements applicable to us or our institutions. If the results of any such audits, reviews, investigations, claims or actions are unfavorable to us, we may be required to pay monetary damages or be subject to fines, operational limitations, loss of federal funding, injunctions, additional oversight and reporting, provisional certification or other civil or criminal penalties. In addition, if EDthe Department or another regulatory agency determined that one of our institutions improperly disbursed Title IV Program funds or violated a provision of the Higher Education Act or ED’sthe Department’s regulations, that institution could be required to repay such funds, and could be assessed an administrative fine.

See Note 11 “Contingencies” to our consolidated financial statements for discussion of several of these matters we have pending, including that in December 2011 ED moved all of our institutions from what is called the Advance Method of Payment of Title IV funds to what is called Heightened Cash Monitoring 1, or HCM1, status. Although our prior practices substantially conformed to the requirements of this more restrictive method of drawing down students’ Title IV Program funds, as noted above, ED subsequently adopted new cash management regulations for institutions on HCM1 that have increased overall student borrowing and usage of stipend payments for non-education related expenses. If ED finds violations of the Higher Education Act or related regulations, ED may impose monetary or program level sanctions, or transfer our institutions to the “reimbursement” or Heightened Cash Monitoring 2 (“HCM2”) method of payment of Title IV Program funds, which could result in a significant delay in receiving those funds.

In October 2014, ED initiated an on-site program review of one of our third party servicers, Higher One, and simultaneous off-site program review of CTU. The review focused on CTU’s cash management processes involving the issuance of Title IV credit balances via stored value cards. The review covered the 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15 award years. On August 18, 2017, ED released the initial program review report, which contained no material findings or liability. On October 17, 2017, CTU provided a written response to the program review report and on January 8, 2018, ED notified CTU that it reviewed CTU’s response and had closed the program review with no further action required.

In July 2015, ED conducted an ordinary course on-site program review of AIU’s administration of Title IV Programs in which the institution participates. The review covered the 2014-2015 award year with a specific focus on the programs the institution offers via distance education. We have remained responsive to any information requests from ED in this regard; however, we have not yet received the initial program review report.

In November 2015, we were notified by ED that it, with the assistance of an external accounting firm, was going to conduct an assessment of CEC’s compliance with the Student Right to Know Act. The review generally covers all CEC institutions with active OPEIDs and several institutions with OPEIDS for schools that we have closed or sold, but that had graduates and reported placement rates for the cohort under review. The notification included a request for an extensive volume of information related to placement and graduation rates for the cohort of students graduating between July 1, 2013 and June 30, 2014, together with supporting documentation for reported placements, policies and procedures for collecting and reporting placement information, required website program disclosures, information related to student complaints, employees responsible for placement tracking and reporting and advertising materials. We provided ED and its accounting firm with the requested information during the first three quarters of 2016 and have not heard anything further with regard to the status of this review; however, the review largely focused on institutions that have since closed.  

The Higher Education Act also requires that an institution’s administration of Title IV Program funds be audited annually by an independent accounting firm and that the resulting audit report be submitted to EDthe Department for review. In September 2016, ED’sthe Department’s Office of Inspector General released a revised audit guide applicable specifically to proprietary schools and third-party servicers administering Title IV programs. The updated guide is effective for fiscal years beginning after June 30, 2016. The revised audit guide iswas effective for us for the year ending December 31, 2017 and will be utilized forapplies to annual compliance audits submitted no later thandue June 30, 2018.2018 and thereafter. The new guide significantly increases the requirements and testing procedures necessary when filing our annual Title IV compliance audits; we are currently working with our audit firm to comply with the new guide.

Gainful Employment

CEC institutions, and most other for-profit institutions, qualify for Title IV Program participation on the basis that they offer programs that, in addition to meeting other requirements, “prepare students for gainful employment in a recognized occupation.” During 2013, ED established negotiated rulemaking committees, one specifically designed to limit Title IV availability for programs at for-profit institutions by defining gainful employment in a recognized occupation. On October 30, 2014, ED published a new complex final regulation, effective July 1, 2015, to define “gainful employment” as meeting certain standards measuring the general amount students borrow for enrollment in a program against an amount of their reported earnings. Prior to this rulemaking, the term

15

gainful employment had been used in the Higher Education Act for forty years, and had not been further defined by Congress or ED. A summary of the gainful employment regulation that took effect on July 1, 2015 is set forth below.

On June 14, 2017, ED announced its intention to convene new negotiated rulemaking committees to consider modifications to the gainful employment regulation. Committee negotiations commenced in late 2017. ED has not established a final schedule for publication of proposed or final regulations; however, any regulations published in final form by November 1, 2018 typically would take effect on July 1, 2019. The outcome of these rulemaking initiatives and the impact of any new or modified regulations are uncertain at this time.

Current Regulation. The definition effective July 1, 2015 establishes a formula by which ED will determine if a program is eligible to participate in Title IV Programs. The regulation requires graduates of programs within three years (or less) beyond graduation to, on average, have debt with annual loan payments that are less than 8% of their annual earnings or 20% of their discretionary income. Programs whose graduates have debt with annual loan payments that accounts for between 8% and 12% of their annual earnings, or between 20% and 30% of their discretionary income, will be considered to be in the “zone” for meeting the gainful employment standard. Programs whose graduates have debt with annual loan payments that are greater than 12% of annual earnings or 30% of discretionary income will fail the gainful employment test. Institutions with a program that fails to meet the gainful employment test for two out of three consecutive years, or that is in the zone (or fails) for four consecutive years, lose eligibility for that program to participate in Title IV Programs for at least three years. Institutions with a program that is within a year of potentially disqualifying for participation in Title IV must notify current and prospective students of the program of its potential loss of access to Title IV Program funds and the plan for continuation of the program or refunding tuition to students should the program fail to pass the gainful employment threshold in the subsequent year.

Under the gainful employment regulation, debt is calculated based on the lesser of actual median or mean debt, or the cost of tuition, fees, books, supplies and equipment. For the first five to seven years after ED begins to report gainful employment results, depending upon the length of the academic program, ED will allow the substitution of the average debt of the most recent graduating cohort for the average debt of the measurement cohort. Earnings are based on data provided by the Social Security Administration (“SSA”) to ED. Institutions have an opportunity to review and correct the list of students submitted to the Social Security Administration for the earnings query, but do not have an opportunity to inspect, review, question or appeal the results provided by SSA.

The gainful employment regulation includes a requirement that institutions disclose program level cohort default rates if directed to do so by ED.

On January 8, 2017, final initial year gainful employment rates were published publicly for all institutions subject to the rules. The announcement was made with an ED press release stating that over 800 programs had not met its new criteria for gainful employment and another 1,239 programs were in the “zone” for meeting the gainful employment standard. In line with our expectations, AIU had two, and CTU had three, of its continuing programs in the “zone” for meeting the gainful employment standard. Each university also had one active program that failed to meet the standard; however, both of these programs have since ceased enrolling new students.

We continue to closely monitor the continuing programs within our University Group that are in the zone or are close to the threshold for being in the zone. The most significant of these are the Criminal Justice programs at AIU and CTU, which represent approximately 17% of University Group total enrollments as of December 31, 2017. Under the current regulation, a program does not lose Title IV Program eligibility unless it fails the gainful employment test for two out of three consecutive years, or is in the zone (or fails) for four consecutive years. We also continue to monitor programs that are in teach-out and did not pass this first year of the gainful employment test and we believe we will be able to minimize any impact to our students of a loss of Title IV Program eligibility prior to completion of a teach-out, if such a loss were to occur. These programs remain Title IV eligible unless and until they fail a second time in a three-year period. Because we rely on ED to provide us with the historical salary and debt information that is used in these calculations and due to the historical nature of the data used in the test, there can be no assurance that our actions will result in future compliance and the regulation could adversely affect the eligibility of the programs we offer.

The gainful employment regulation included significant new disclosure requirements and created additional certifications to which the chief executive officer of an institution must attest, including that the programs offered by the institution meet the requirements of states or professional licensing bodies in order for graduates to practice in the field. Also included in the regulation is a requirement that any new or re-enrolled student must receive, either in person or by email, and acknowledge program level gainful employment disclosures, prior to signing an enrollment agreement, registering for classes or entering into a financial commitment with the institution. On June 30, 2017, ED announced that it was delaying aspects of the regulation requiring these program disclosures be distributed in person or via email until July 1, 2018. However, the requirement that updated gainful employment disclosures be published on an institution’s program websites remains in effect and ED periodically revises the required template for these disclosures. We do not know if the new disclosure process that requires a separate email acknowledgement from our online students of program level gainful employment disclosures will have any material impact on our enrollments in the future.

There can be no assurance that our future actions will result in compliance with the existing regulation or any new or modified regulation and the eligibility of the programs we offer could be adversely affected. See Item 1A, “Risk Factors – Risks Related to the

16

Highly Regulated Field in Which We Operate - ED’s gainful employment regulation may limit the programs we can offer students and increase our cost of operations,” for more information about risks associated with the gainful employment regulation.audits.

“90-10 Rule”

Under a provision of the Higher Education Act commonly referred to as the “90-10 Rule,” any of our institutions that, on modified cash basis accounting, derives more than 90% of its cash receipts from Title IV sources for a fiscal year will be placed on provisional participation status for its next two fiscal years. If an institution does not satisfy the 90-10 Rule for two consecutive fiscal

16

years, it will lose its eligibility to participate in Title IV Programs for at least two fiscal years. We have substantially no control over the amount of Title IV student loans and grants sought by or awarded to our students. If an institution violates the 90-10 Rule and becomes ineligible to participate in Title IV Programs but continues to disburse Title IV Program funds, EDthe Department could require repayment of all Title IV Program funds received by it after the effective date of the loss of eligibility.

We have implemented various measures intended to reduce the percentage of our institution’s cash basis revenue attributable to Title IV Program funds, including emphasizing employer-paid and other direct-pay education programs;programs such as our corporate partnerships, diversifying our educational offerings to increase the portion of our students who do not rely on Title IV Programs, recruitment of international students, the use of externally funded scholarships and grants;grants and counseling students to carefully evaluate the amount of necessary Title IV Program borrowing.

Our preliminary calculation of the 90-10 rates for our institutions for the year ended December 31, 2021 is approximately 84% for CTU and approximately 86% for AIUS, which are in compliance with the 90-10 Rule. However, as discussed above in “Legislative Action and Recent Department Regulatory Initiatives,”the 90-10 Rule is currently subject to revision as part of a negotiated rulemaking process and we expect the calculation under the existing rule to be replaced with a new calculation that alters the measurement under the rule from the percentage of Title IV Program tuition revenue an institution receives to the percentage of “federal educational assistance” an institution receives, with what constitutes “federal educational assistance” to be defined in regulations to be adopted following the negotiated rulemaking process. We expect “federal educational assistance” under the revised rule to be defined more broadly than Title IV Program tuition revenue an institution receives as under the existing rule, making compliance with the revised rule more difficult. For example, government education assistance for military or veteran personnel is likely to be considered “federal educational assistance” under the revised rule.

The ability of our institutions to maintain 90-10 rates below 90% will depend on the impact of future changes in our student enrollment mix, and regulatory and other factors outside of our control, including any reductionchanges in government education assistance for military or veteran personnel, including veterans, orand changes in the treatment of such funding for purposes of the 90-10 rate calculation. ChangesIn addition, changes in, or new interpretations of, the technical aspects of the calculation methodology or other industry practices under the 90-10 Rule could further significantly impact our compliance with the 90-10 Rule.

For our 2017 fiscal year, our preliminary review of our institutions’ 90-10 Rule percentages results in none of our institutions exceeding the 90% limit.

See Item 1A, “Risk Factors – Risks Related to the Highly Regulated Field in Which We Operate – Our institutions could lose their eligibility to participate in federal student financial aid programs or have other limitations placed upon them if the percentage of their revenues derived from those programs is too high,” for additional information regarding risks relating to the 90-10 Rule.

Student Loan Default Rates

An institution may lose eligibility to participate in some or all Title IV Programs if the rates at which its former students default on the repayment of their federally-guaranteed or federally-funded student loans exceed specified percentages. This is determined by an institution’s cohort default rate which is calculated on an annual basis as a measure of administrative capability. Each cohort is the group of students who first enter into student loan repayment during a federal fiscal year (ending September 30). The measurement period for theAn institution’s cohort default rate is calculated as the percentage of borrowers who entered repayment in the relevant federal fiscal year who default before the end of the second fiscal year following the fiscal year in which the borrowers entered repayment. This represents a three-year measurement period.

If an institution’s three-year cohort default rate exceeds 10% for any one of the three preceding years, it must delay for 30 days the release of the first disbursement of U.S. federal student loan proceeds to first time borrowers enrolled in the first year of an undergraduate program. As a matter of regular practice, all of our institutions have implemented a 30-day delay for such disbursements.

If an institution’s three-year cohort default rate exceeds 30% for any given year, it must establish a default prevention task force and develop a default prevention plan with measurable objectives for improving the cohort default rate.

Excessive three-year cohort default rates will result in the loss of an institution’s Title IV eligibility, as follows:

We have student loan default management initiatives aimed at reducing the likelihood of our students’ failure to repay their loans in a timely manner. These initiatives emphasize the importance of students’ compliance with loan repayment requirements and provide for loan counseling and communication with students after they cease enrollment. Our efforts supplement the counseling, processing and other student loan servicing work performed by EDthe Department through contracts it has with select third parties. The quality and nature of the student loan servicing work performed by EDthe Department has a direct impact on our cohort default rates and we have experienced past performance failures by EDthe Department and its student loan servicers in outreach to students which adversely impact the cohort default rates at our institutions. On January 18, 2017, the largest of ED’s student loan servicers, Navient, was sued by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the Illinois and Washington Attorneys General for allegedly failing to properly counsel and support student loan borrowers. We know many of our students have Navient as their designated student loan servicer, however we are not able to determine what impact the alleged conduct, if accurate, may have had or will have on cohort default rates.

17

See Item 1A, “Risk Factors – Risks Related to the Highly Regulated Field in Which We Operate – Our institutions could lose their eligibility to participate in federal student financial aid programs or have other limitations placed upon them if their student loan cohort default rates are greater than the standards set by ED,the Department,” for additional information regarding risks relating to cohort default rates.

In September 2017, ED2021, the Department released the official three-year cohort default rates for the 20142018 cohort. EachBoth of our institutions had cohort default rates under the 30% threshold for the 20142018 cohort. We increased our student communication, counseling and other efforts in this area beginning in late 2016 and have begun to see improvements in the cohort default rate beginning with the 2016 cohort. A listing of the official 2014, 20132018, 2017 and 20122016 three-year cohort default rates for our universitiesinstitutions is provided in the table below.

______________________

As part of the CARES Act, which was signed into law on March 27, 2020, federal student loan payments and interest were suspended for a period of time, which the Department has periodically extended currently through May 1, 2022. During this period, student loan borrowers have their loans placed in forbearance, and as such, are no longer required to make payments on their federal student loans. Consequently, no further defaults can occur during this period. Based on this forbearance, and more specifically the timing of it, we expect a favorable impact to the 2019-2020 cohort default rates, with the expectation that these rates will be lower as compared to 2018, which were also favorably impacted by the forbearance to a lesser extent. After the forbearance ends, all students will need to resume their next normally scheduled payment. It is unclear how many students will commence their regularly scheduled payments when the forbearance expires, and whether the loan servicers will be able to handle the volume of borrowers resuming repayment obligations all at the same time. As a result, whether this forbearance has any negative impact on future cohorts is unclear.

Borrower Defense to Repayment

On October 28, 2016, ED issued complex, significantthe Department adopted new regulations that cover multiple issues including the processes and standards for the discharge of federal student loans, which are commonly referred to as “borrower defense to repayment.”repayment” regulations. The Department initially delayed the effective date of these regulations; however, after a successful legal challenge against the delay, the Department published guidance to institutions on March 15, 2019 regarding how to implement the 2016 regulations werewhile noting that a new set of regulations was forthcoming. On September 23, 2019, the Department published in the Federal Register on November 1, 2016 and were generallynew final “borrower defense to becomerepayment” regulations that became effective on July 1, 2017. However, in response to pending litigation challenging the2020. The new 2019 final borrower defense to repayment regulations on June 14, 2017 ED announced an indefinite delayare summarized below and will result in the effective date of the 2016 regulations while it conducts further reviewa distinct loan discharge process and a new negotiated rulemaking processstandards applicable to replace the previously adopted regulations. On October 24, 2017, ED published two related notices in the Federal Register. Thefederal student loans first again citing the pending litigation and uncertain outcome, was an interim final rule setting the effective date of the delayed regulations asdisbursed after July 1, 2018. The second, was a proposed extension of the delay for an extra year, through July 1, 2019, to permit ED to conclude its negotiated rulemaking to amend the 2016 regulations and to provide adequate time for institutions to prepare for the implementation of its modified requirements.

Following its June 14, 2017 announcement of its intention to convene new negotiated rulemaking committees to consider modifications2020. Further changes to the borrower defense to repayment regulations committee negotiations commencedare being considered. See Legislative Action and Recent Department Regulatory Initiatives - Negotiated Rulemaking 2021: Affordability and Student Loans” for more information.

2019 Final Regulations – Summary

Loan Discharge. The 2019 borrower defense to repayment regulations significantly alter how loan discharge applications will be treated by the Department. In addition to adopting the more balanced burden of proof standard of “preponderance of the evidence,” the 2019 regulations provide for a single new federal standard for a misrepresentation claim a student may assert against its school. Under the new standard, an individual borrower may assert a defense to repayment based on the institution’s statement, act, or omission that is false, misleading, or deceptive. To be eligible for relief, the borrower would be required to demonstrate that the misrepresentation (1) was made with knowledge of its false, misleading, or deceptive nature or with a reckless disregard for the truth, (2) was relied upon by the borrower in late 2017. ED hasmaking an enrollment decision, and (3) caused the student financial harm.

In addition, the 2019 final regulations eliminate the concept of automatic group loan discharges contained in the 2016 regulations and require individual claims to be made by students and include a process for the institution to provide a defense to any claims asserted.

Financial Responsibility. The 2019 final borrower defense to repayment regulations contain a number of triggering events that will result in an institution not establishedqualifying as financially responsible or administratively capable. These triggering events include:

18

Additionally, the 2019 final regulations include more definitive financial events that will cause the Department to re-calculate an institution’s most recent financial responsibility composite score to determine whether the losses or reduction in owner’s equity from the event cause the composite score to fall below 1.0. The composite score is one measure the Department uses to evaluate an institution’s financial responsibility using annual financial statements. These triggering events that can lead to the recalculation of a composite score include, but are not limited to:

         The 2019 final schedule for publicationregulations also keep select discretionary triggering events contained in the 2016 regulations that allow the Department to designate an institution as not financially responsible. These discretionary triggering events include:

The triggering events in the 2019 final regulations are significantly less subjective than a number of proposedthe eliminated triggering events that were included in the 2016 regulations. If any of the triggering events materialize, our institutions may be required to post a letter of credit equal to 10% or more of the institution’s previous year’s annual Title IV disbursements.

Repayment Rate Disclosure Eliminated. The 2019 final regulations; however, anydefense to repayment regulations published in final form by November 1, 2018 typically would take effect oneliminated a separate repayment rate disclosure obligation from the 2016 regulations that applied only to for-profit institutions.

Student Loans Disbursed Prior to July 1, 2019.2020

A groupPrior to the July 1, 2020 effective date of attorneys general filedthe 2019 final regulations, institutions were required to follow the 2016 regulations, subject to the Department’s guidance and direction. As a lawsuit onresult, student loans disbursed between July 6,1, 2017 in federal courtand July 1, 2020 will follow the loan discharge processes outlined in the District2016 regulations. The 2016 regulations allow the Department to process discharge claims on a group basis, has a much broader definition of Columbiawhat constitutes an eligible misrepresentation, including inadvertent errors, has a lower burden of proof for students and fewer due process protections for institutions.Student loans disbursed before July 1, 2017 will follow the Department’s original discharge standards and processes that specify that a borrower may assert a defense to challengerepayment based on an act or omission by the legal authority for ED’s delayschool that would give rise to a cause of action under state law. Causes of action under state law are broad and therefore we believe that most student claims would likely give rise to a cause of action under state law.

Pending Borrower Defense to Repayment Applications

In May 2021, the Department notified the Company that the Department has several thousand borrower defense applications that make claims regarding the Company’s institutions, including institutions that have ceased operations. As part of the effectivenessinitial fact-finding process, the Department will send individual student claims to the Company and allow the institutions the opportunity to submit responses to the borrower defense applications. A large majority of the claims received involve institutions or campuses that have ceased operations and, in some cases, involve students who attended over 25 years ago. We have submitted initial responses to the claims received which indicate that we believe the applications fail to establish a valid borrower defense and the Department should therefore deny them. We continue to respond to substantial requests for information going back as far as 25 years with respect to these claims. The outcome of the Department’s evaluation of each of these applications is uncertain.

See Item 1A, “Risk Factors – Risks Related to the Highly Regulated Field in Which We Operate - ‘Borrower defense to repayment’ regulations, including closed school discharges, may subject us to significant repayment liability to the Department for discharged federal student loans and posting of substantial letters of credit that may limit our ability to make investments in our business which could negatively impact our future growth,”for more information about risks associated with the borrower defense to repayment regulations.

The outcome of these rulemaking initiatives and legal proceedings and the impact of any new or modified regulations are uncertain at this time.

Loan Discharge. The 2016 borrower defense to repayment regulations set forth categories of borrower defenses that could be asserted by students with respect to student loans disbursed on or after July 1, 2017 and established an automatic discharge process associated with closed schools. In most cases, the 2016 regulations entitle ED to seek reimbursement from the institution for any loans discharged under new standards which are designed to be lenient and accommodating of student claims. The current negotiated rulemaking does not rely on the 2016 borrower defense to repayment regulations as a starting point and therefore may result in a different set of regulatory proposals, although similar topics and themes are being discussed. We have in the past had claims made against us that if successfully made in the future could provide a basis for borrower claims for discharge of student loans. We cannot predict the extent to which any new regulation seeking recoupment from institutions for student loans that ED discharges may impact us.

Financial Responsibility Changes Included in the Rulemaking. The current negotiated rulemaking is also exploring whether, and the extent to which, modifications are appropriate to rules governing financial responsibility and administrative capability requirements that were in effect before the 2016 borrower defense to repayment regulations. Both the 2016 regulations and current negotiated rulemaking include discussion of triggering events that would provide ED broad discretion regarding periodic determinations of our financial responsibility and associated enhanced financial protection in the form of a letter of credit or other security it determines it needs.

Financial Responsibility Standards

To participate in Title IV Programs, our institutions must either satisfy standards of financial responsibility prescribed by ED,the Department, or post a letter of credit in favor of EDthe Department and possibly accept other conditions on its participation in Title IV

19

Programs. Pursuant to the

18

Title IV Program regulations, each eligible higher education institution must, among other things, satisfy a quantitative standard of financial responsibility that is based on a weighted average of three annual tests which assess the financial condition of the institution. The three tests measure primary reserve, equity and net income ratios. The Primary Reserve Ratio is a measure of an institution’s financial viability and liquidity. The Equity Ratio is a measure of an institution’s capital resources and its ability to borrow. The Net Income Ratio is a measure of an institution’s profitability. These tests provide three individual scores that are converted into a single composite score. The maximum composite score is 3.0. If the institution achieves a composite score of at least 1.5, it is considered financially responsible without conditions or additional oversight. A composite score from 1.0 to 1.4 is considered to be in “the zone” of financial responsibility, and a composite score of less than 1.0 is not considered to be financially responsible. If an institution is in “the zone” of financial responsibility, the institution may establish eligibility to continue to participate in Title IV Programs on the following alternative bases:

•Zone Alternative. Under what is referred to as the “zone alternative,” an institution may continue to participate in Title IV Programs for up to three years under additional monitoring and reporting procedures but without having to post a letter of credit in favor of ED.the Department. These additional monitoring and reporting procedures include being transferred from the “advance” method of payment of Title IV Program funds to cash monitoring status (referred to as Heightened Cash Monitoring 1, or “HCM1,” status) or to the “reimbursement” or Heightened Cash Monitoring 2 (“HCM2”) methods of payment. If an institution does not achieve a composite score of at least 1.0 in one of the three subsequent years or does not improve its financial condition to attain a composite score of at least 1.5 by the end of the three-year period, the institution must satisfy another alternative standard to continue participating in Title IV Programs.

•Letter of Credit Alternative. An institution that fails to meet one of the standards of financial responsibility, including by having a composite score less than 1.5, may demonstrate financial responsibility by submitting an irrevocable letter of credit to EDthe Department in an amount equal to at least 50% of the Title IV Program funds that the institution received during its most recently completed fiscal year.

•Provisional Certification. If an institution fails to meet one of the standards of financial responsibility, including by having a composite score less than 1.5, EDthe Department may permit the institution to participate under provisional certification for up to three years. If EDthe Department permits an institution to participate under provisional certification, an institution must comply with the requirements of the “zone alternative,” including being transferred to the HCM1, HCM2 or “reimbursement” method of payment of Title IV Program funds, and must submit a letter of credit to EDthe Department in an amount determined by EDthe Department which can range from 10%-100% of the Title IV Program funds that the institution received during its most recently completed fiscal year. If an institution is still not financially responsible at the end of the period of provisional certification, including because it has a composite score of less than 1.0, EDthe Department may again permit provisional certification subject to the terms EDthe Department determines appropriate.

EDThe Department applies its quantitative financial responsibility tests annually based on an institution’s audited financial statements and may apply the tests if an institution undergoes a change in control or under other circumstances. EDThe Department also may apply the tests to the parent company of our institutions, and to other related entities. Our composite score for the consolidated entity for the year ended December 31, 20162020 was 1.9,3.0, and our preliminary calculation for the year ended December 31, 20172021 is also 3.0, which areis the highest possible score and considered financially responsible without conditions or additional oversight. If in the future we are required to satisfy ED’sThe Department’s standards of financial responsibility on an alternative basis, including potentially by posting irrevocable letters of credit, we may not have the capacity to post these letters of credit.

Accreditor and state regulatory requirements also address financial responsibility, and these requirements vary among agencies and also are different from the EDDepartment requirements. Any developments relating to our satisfaction of ED’sthe Department’s financial responsibility requirements may lead to additional focus or review by our accreditors or applicable state agencies regarding their respective financial responsibility requirements.

See Item 1A, “Risk Factors – Risks Related to the Highly Regulated Field in Which We Operate – A failure to demonstrate ‘financial responsibility’ or ‘administrative capability’ would have negative impacts on our operations,” for additional information regarding risks relating to the financial responsibility standards.

Return and Refunds of Title IV Program Funds

An institution participating in Title IV Programs must correctly calculate the amount of unearned Title IV Program funds that were disbursed to students who withdrewwithdraw from their educational programs before completing the programs, and must return those funds to the government in a timely manner.

The portion of tuition and fee payments received frombilled to students but not yet earned is recorded as deferred tuition revenue and reflected as a current liability on our consolidated balance sheets, as such amounts represent revenue that we expect to earn within the next year. If a student withdraws from one of our institutions prior to the completion of the academic term, or program period, we refund the portion of tuition and fees already paid that we are not entitled to retain, pursuant to applicable federal and state law and accrediting agency standards and our refund policy. The amount of funds to be refunded on behalf of a student is calculated based upon the period of time in which the student has attended classes and the amount of tuition and fees paid by the student as of the student’s withdrawal date. Such refunds typically result in a reduction to deferred tuition revenue and cash on our consolidated

1920

balance sheets, because generally, we do not recognize tuition revenue in our consolidated statements of (loss) income and comprehensive (loss) income until related refund provisions have lapsed.

Institutions are required to return any unearned Title IV funds within 45 days of the date the institution determines that the student has withdrawn. An institution that is found to be in non-compliance with EDthe Department refund requirements for either of the last two completed fiscal years must post a letter of credit in favor of EDthe Department in an amount equal to 25% of the total Title IV Program returns that were paid or should have been paid by the institution during its most recently completed fiscal year. As of December 31, 2017,2021, we have posted no letters of credit in favor of EDthe Department due to non-compliance with EDthe Department refund requirements.

Change of Ownership or Control

When an institution undergoes a change of ownership resulting in a change of control, as that term is defined by the state in which it is located, its accrediting agency and ED,the Department, it must secure the approval of those agencies to continue to operate and to continue to participate in Title IV Programs. If the institution is unable to re-establish state authorization and accreditation requirements and satisfy other requirements for certification by ED,the Department, the institution may lose its authority to operate and its ability to participate in Title IV Programs. An institution whose change of ownership or control is approved by the appropriate authorities is nonetheless provisionally re-certified by EDthe Department for a period of up to three years. Transactions or events that constitute a change of control by one or more of the applicable regulatory agencies, including ED,the Department, applicable state agencies, and accrediting bodies, include the acquisition of an institution from another entity or significant acquisition or disposition of an institution’s equity. It is possible that some of these events may occur without our control. Our failure to obtain, or a delay in obtaining, a required approval of any change in control from ED,the Department, applicable state agencies, or accrediting agencies could impair our ability or the ability of the affected institutions to participate in Title IV Programs. If we were to undergo a change of control and a material number of our institutions failed to obtain the required approvals from applicable regulatory agencies in a timely manner, our student population, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows could be materially adversely affected.

When we acquire an institution that is eligible to participate in Title IV Programs, that institution typically undergoes a change of ownership resulting in a change of control as defined by ED. Each of ourthe Department. Our acquired institutions hasin the past have undergone a certification review under our ownership and hashave been certified to participate in Title IV Programs on a provisional basis, per EDDepartment requirements, until such time that EDthe Department signs a new program participation agreement with the institution. Currently, noneneither of our institutions areis subject to provisional certification status due to ED’sthe Department’s change of ownership criteria. The potential adverse effects of a change of control under EDDepartment regulations may influence future decisions by us and our stockholders regarding the sale, purchase, transfer, issuance or redemption of our common stock.

Opening New Institutions, Start-up Campuses and Adding Educational Programs

The Higher Education Act generally requires that for-profit institutions be fully operational for two years before applying to participate in Title IV Programs. However, an institution that is certified to participate in Title IV Programs may establish a start-up branch campus or location and participate in Title IV Programs at the start-up campus without reference to the two-year requirement if the start-up campus has received all of the necessary state and accrediting agency approvals, has been reported to ED,the Department, and meets certain other criteria as defined by ED.the Department. Nevertheless, under certain circumstances, a start-up branch campus may also be required to obtain approval from EDthe Department to be able to participate in Title IV Programs.

In addition to EDthe Department regulations, certain of the state and accrediting agencies with jurisdiction over our institutions have requirements that may affect our ability to open a new institution, open a start-up branch campus or location of one of our existing institutions, or begin offering a new educational program at one of our institutions. If we establish a new institution, add a new branch start-up campus, or expand program offerings at any of our institutions without obtaining the required approvals, we would likely be liable for repayment of Title IV Program funds provided to students at that institution or branch campus or enrolled in that educational program, and we could also be subject to sanctions. Also, if we are unable to obtain the approvals from ED,the Department, applicable state regulatory agencies, and accrediting agencies for any new institutions, branch campuses, or program offerings where such approvals are required, or to obtain such approvals in a timely manner, our ability to grow our business would be impaired and our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows could be materially adversely affected.

Administrative Capability

EDThe Department regulations specify extensive criteria that an institution must satisfy to establish that it has the requisite administrative capability to participate in Title IV Programs. These criteria relate to, among other things, institutional staffing, operational standards such as procedures for disbursing and safeguarding Title IV Program funds, timely submission of accurate reports to EDthe Department and various other procedural matters. If an institution fails to satisfy any of ED’sthe Department’s criteria for administrative capability, EDthe Department may require the repayment of Title IV Program funds disbursed by the institution, place the institution on provisional certification status, require the institution to receive Title IV Program funds under another funding arrangement, impose fines or limit or terminate the participation of the institution in Title IV Programs.

20

Restrictions on Payment of Commissions, Bonuses and Other Incentive Payments

An institution participating in Title IV Programs cannot provide any commission, bonus, or other incentive payment based directly or indirectly on success in securing enrollments or Title IV financial aid to any persons or entities engaged in any student

21

recruiting or admission activities or in making decisions regarding the award of student financial assistance. Regulations issued in October 2010 which became effective July 1, 2011 rescinded previously issued EDDepartment guidance and “safe harbors” relied upon by higher education institutions in making decisions how they managed, compensated and promoted individuals engaged in student recruiting and the awarding of financial aid and their supervisors. The elimination of these “safe harbor” protections and guidance required us to terminate certain compensation payments to our affected employees and to implement changes in contractual and other arrangements with third parties to change structures formerly allowed under EDDepartment rules, and has had an impact on our ability to compensate, recruit, retain and motivate affected admissions and other affected employees as well as on our business arrangements with third-party lead generators and other marketing vendors. In September 2016, ED’sthe Department’s Office of Inspector General released a revised audit guide applicable specifically to for-profit schools that requires an annual audit to review compliance with the incentive compensation restrictions.

Further, EDthe Department provided very limited published guidance regarding this rule and does not establish clear criteria for compliance for many circumstances. If EDthe Department determined that an institution’s compensation practices violated these standards, EDthe Department could subject the institution to substantial monetary fines, penalties or other sanctions.

Substantial Misrepresentation

The Higher Education Act prohibits an institution participating in Title IV Programs from engaging in substantial misrepresentation of the nature of its educational programs, financial charges, graduate employability or its relationship with ED.the Department. Under ED’sthe Department’s rules, a "misrepresentation" is any statement (made in writing, visually, orally or otherwise) made by the institution, any of its representatives or a third party that provides educational programs, marketing, advertising, recruiting, or admissions services to the institution, that is false, erroneous or has the likelihood or tendency to deceive, and a "substantial misrepresentation" is any misrepresentation on which the person to whom it was made could reasonably be expected to rely, or has reasonably relied, to that person’s detriment. Considering the broad definition of “substantial misrepresentation,” it is possible that, despite our training efforts and compliance programs, our institutions' employees or service providers may make statements that could be construed as substantial misrepresentations. In addition, ED’s gainful employment regulation requiresIf the disclosure of select student outcome metrics and includes disclosure of a number of new metrics on institutional websites and during enrollment to all new students. Errors or omissions in these metrics may be used by ED as the basis for a finding of “substantial misrepresentation.” If EDDepartment determines that one of our institutions has engaged in substantial misrepresentation, EDthe Department may revoke the institution’s program participation agreement, deny applications from the institution for approval of new programs or locations or other matters, or initiate proceedings under its borrower defense to repayment regulations to fine the institution or limit, suspend, or terminate its eligibility to participate in Title IV Programs; the institution could also be exposed to increased risk of action under the Federal False Claims Act.

OTHER INFORMATION

Our website address is www.careered.comwww.perdoceoed.com. We make available within the “Investor Relations” portion of our website under the caption “Financial Information,“Annual Reports and SEC Filings,” free of charge, our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, and current reports on Form 8-K, including any amendments to those reports, as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file or furnish such materials to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). Materials that we file or furnish to the SEC may also be read and copied at the SEC’s Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, N.E., Washington, DC 20549. Information on the operation of the Public Reference Room may be obtained by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. Also, the SEC maintains an Internet site at www.sec.gov that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information that we file electronically with the SEC. Information contained on our website is expressly not incorporated by reference into this Form 10-K.

2122

Risks Related to the Highly Regulated Field in Which We Operate

If our institutions fail to complyCompliance with the extensive regulatory requirements applicable to our business wecan be costly and time consuming, and failure to comply could incurresult in financial penalties, restrictions on our operations, loss of federal and state financial aid funding for our students, or loss of our authorization to operate our institutions.

WeAs a provider of postsecondary education and a participant in federal and state programs providing financial assistance to students, we are subject to extensive laws and regulation at both the federal and state regulation as a provider of postsecondary education. The applicable regulatorylevels and by accrediting agencies. These requirements cover virtually all phases of the operationsaspects of our institutions, including educational program offerings, facilities, instructional and administrative staff, administrative procedures, marketing and recruiting, financial operations, payment of refunds to students who withdraw, financial aid to students, acquisitions or openings of new institutions, additions of new educational programs, closure or relocation of existing locations and changes in corporate structure and ownership. ED is our primary federal regulator pursuant tobusiness.

In particular, the Higher Education Act.

A significant portion of our U.S.-based students rely onAct authorizes Title IV Programs and we derive a substantial portion of our revenue and cash flows from Title IV Programs. For example, for the year ended December 31, 2017, approximately 86% of our U.S.-based students who were in a program of study at any date during that year participated in Title IV Programs, which resulted in Title IV Program cash receipts recorded by the Company of approximately $441 million.

All of our institutions participate in Title IV Programs and are subjectsubjects participants to extensive regulation by ED,the Department, state education agencies and accrediting agencies. Our institutions’ participation in education assistance programs administered by the Departments of Defense and Veterans Affairs also subject us to oversight by those agencies. In addition, other federal agencies such as the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) and the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) and various state agencies and accrediting commissions. To participatestate attorneys general enforce a broad range of consumer protection and other laws applicable to activities of postsecondary educational institutions, such as recruiting, marketing, the protection of personal information, student financing and payment servicing.

Because of these regulatory requirements, we are subject to compliance reviews and audits as well as claims of noncompliance and lawsuits by government agencies, regulatory agencies, students, employees and other third parties. These matters often require the expenditure of substantial time and resources to address and may damage our reputation, even if such actions are eventually determined to be without merit. For example, the Department has broad powers to request information and review records of an institution participating in Title IV Programs, an institution must receivePrograms. These requests do not necessarily relate to any specific allegations of wrong-doing or even assert any compliance failures of any kind. We received such a request in December 2021. In addition to responding to compliance reviews and maintain authorization by the appropriate state education agencies, be accredited by an accrediting commission recognized by ED, and be certified by ED as an eligible institution. Most ED requirements are applied on an institutional basis, with each institution assigned an identification number known as an OPEID, or Office of Postsecondary Education Identification number. Each institution’s branchesaudits and other locations, regardlessinformational requests, we have had significant matters pending against us in the past which have resulted in the payment of whether they are campus-basedsignificant amounts to settle the matters and our agreement to ongoing compliance and operational matters. In this regard, see Item I, “Business – Accreditation, State Regulation and Other Compliance Matters – Other Compliance Matters,” for discussion of agreements undertaken in connection with several matters resolved in recent years.

Compliance with reviews and audits and applicable laws, regulations, standards or online, are assignedpolicies may impose significant burdens and a failure to comply could result in financial penalties, restrictions on our operations, loss of federal and state financial aid funding for our students, or loss of authorization to operate our institutions.

The extensive regulatory requirements applicable to our business may change, in particular as a result of the institution’s OPEID.scrutiny of the for-profit postsecondary education sector and the results of the 2020 Presidential and Congressional elections, which could require us to make substantial changes to our business, reduce our profitability and make compliance more difficult.

The regulations, standards and policies of our regulators change frequently and are subject to interpretation, particularly where they are crafted for traditional, academic term-based institutions rather thanand interpretations may change over time. In particular, the Department has promulgated a substantial number of new regulations in recent years that impact our non-term academic delivery model. Changes in, or new interpretations of, applicable laws, regulations or standards could have a material adverse effect on our accreditation, authorizationbusiness, including but not limited to operate in various states, permissible activities, receipt of funds under Title IV Programs, or costs of doing business. We cannot predict with certainty how allmultiple versions of the requirements applied by our regulators will be interpreted or whether our institutions will be able“borrower defense to comply with these requirements in the future.

If we are found to have violated any applicablerepayment” regulations standards or policies, we may be subject to the following sanctions, among others, imposed by any one or more of the relevant regulatory agencies or other government bodies:

In addition, findings or allegations of noncompliance may subject us to qui tam lawsuits under the Federal False Claims Act, under which private plaintiffs seek to enforce remedies on behalf of the U.S. and, if successful, are entitled to recover their costs and to receive a portion of any amounts recovered by the U.S. in the lawsuit. We may also be subject to other types of lawsuits or claims by third parties. The costs of these proceedings may be significant and we may not have sufficient resources to fund any material adverse outcomes.

Any of the penalties, injunctions, restrictions, lawsuits or other forms of censure listed above could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. If we lose Title IV Program eligibility, we would experience a dramatic decline in revenue and we would be unable to continue our business as it currently is conducted.

22

Any failure to comply with state laws and regulatory requirements, or new state legislative or regulatory initiatives affecting our institutions, could have a material adverse effect on our total student enrollment, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.

Our institutions are subject to the laws and regulations of the states where our physical campuses are located, and our online institutions are also subject to laws and regulations in other states in which they enroll and/or recruit students. State laws establish standards for, among other things, student instruction, qualifications of faculty, location and nature of facilities and financial policies. In addition, we are subject to state consumer protection laws.  

Attorneys general in many states have become more active in enforcing consumer protection laws, in particular related to recruiting practices and the financing of education at for-profit educational institutions. Further, some state attorneys general have partnered with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the Federal Trade Commission to review industry practices. These actions increase the likelihood of scrutiny of the marketing and advertising practices of educational institutions and may result in unforeseen consequences, increasing risk and making our operating environment more challenging. To the extent that multiple states or government agencies commence investigations or act in concert, the cost of responding to these inquiries and investigations could increase significantly, and the potential impact on our business could be substantially greater. See Note 11 "Contingencies" to our consolidated financial statements for a description of inquiries we received from attorneys general in 21 states plus the District of Columbia, including a collective inquiry by 18 attorneys general relating to potential non-compliance with applicable state consumer protection laws by certain of our institutions.

Adverse media coverage regarding the allegations of state consumer protection law violations by us or other for-profit education companies could damage our reputation, result in deceased enrollments, revenues and profitability, and have a negative impact on our stock price. Such coverage could also result in continued scrutiny and regulation by ED, Congress, accrediting commissions, state legislatures, state attorneys general or other governmental authorities of for-profit educational institutions.

State education laws and regulations may limit our campuses’ ability to operate or to award degrees or diplomas or offer new degree programs. Moreover, under the Higher Education Act, approval by such agencies is necessary to maintain eligibility to participate in Title IV Programs. State legislatures often consider legislation affecting regulation of postsecondary educational institutions. Enactment of this legislation and ensuing regulations, or changes in interpretation of existing regulations, may impose substantial costs on our institutions and require them to modify their operations in order to comply with the new regulations.  

If we are unable to comply with current or future state consumer protection, licensing, authorization or other requirements, or determine that we are unable to cost effectively comply with new or changed requirements, we could be subject to monetary fines or penalties or limitations on the manner in which we conduct our business, or we could lose enrollments, eligibility to participate in Title IV Programs and revenues, in any affected states, which could materially affect our results of operations and our growth opportunities. Loss of authorization in one or more states could increase the likelihood of additional scrutiny and potential loss of authority in other states, which would further impact our business.

If one or more of our institutions fails to maintain institutional accreditation, or if certain of our programs cannot obtain or maintain programmatic accreditation, our student enrollments would diminish and our business would suffer.

Institutional Accreditation. In the U.S., accrediting agencies periodically review the academic quality of an institution's instructional programs and its administrative and financial operations to ensure that the institution has the resources to perform its educational mission. ED relies on accrediting agencies to assess whether an institution's educational programs qualify the institution to participate in Title IV Programs. See Item 1, “Business – Accreditation and Jurisdictional Authorizations – Institutional Accreditation.”

The failure to comply with accreditation standards will subject an institution to additional oversight and reporting requirements, accreditation proceedings such as a show-cause directive, an action to defer or deny action related to an institution's application for a new grant of accreditation or an action to suspend an institution's accreditation or a program's approval. For example, in August 2016 HLC adopted policy changes giving the Commission discretion to designate an institution as a school “in financial distress” or “under government investigation.” These designations may result in additional monitoring and/or financial reporting by the institution and a strict scrutiny review by HLC of any requests for substantive change at the institution, requiring the institution to demonstrate a compelling reason for the change and that it has sufficient resources to support the change. The breadth of the conditions that could result in these designations may cause our HLC-accredited institutions, AIU and CTU, to be labeled with one or possibly both. See Note 11 “Contingencies” to our consolidated financial statements for information regarding the current Heightened Cash Monitoring status imposed on our institutions and certain current pending governmental inquiries.

If our institutions or programs are subject to accreditation actions or are placed on probationary accreditation status, we may experience additional adverse publicity, impaired ability to attract and retain students and substantial expense to obtain unqualified accreditation status. The inability to obtain reaccreditation following periodic reviews or any final loss of institutional accreditation after exhaustion of the administrative agency processes would resultdiscussed in a loss of Title IV Program funds for the affected institution and its students. Such events and any related claims brought against us could have a material adverse impact on our business, reputation, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

23

Programmatic Accreditation. Many states and professional associations require professional programs to be accredited. While programmatic accreditation is not a sufficient basis to qualify for institutional Title IV Program certification, programmatic accreditation may improve employment opportunities for program graduates in their chosen field. Those of our programs that do not have such programmatic accreditation, where available, or fail to maintain such accreditation, may experience adverse publicity, declining enrollments, litigation or other claims from students or suffer other adverse impacts, which could result in it being impractical for us to continue offering such programs.

ED Recognition of Accrediting Agencies. Our participation in Title IV Programs is dependent on ED continuing to recognize the accrediting agencies that accredit our colleges and universities. The standards and practices of these agencies have become a focus of attention by state attorneys general, members of Congress, ED’s Office of Inspector General and ED over recent years. This focus may make the accreditation review process longer and potentially more challenging for all of our remaining institutions when they undergo their normal accreditation review processes. It may also be making the process by which ED evaluates and recognizes accreditors as appropriate Title IV gatekeepers similarly longer and more challenging for our accreditors. HLC, which accredits AIU and CTU, along with other ED recognized accreditors are facing increased political pressure as part of this recognition process to apply heightened levels of scrutiny or review and/or apply new requirements or standards to for-profit institutions. These pressures may result in future modifications to HLC’s accreditation criteria, practices or other policies and procedures, which our universities may not be able to comply with.

Congress may revise the laws governing Title IV Programs or reduce funding for those programs which could reduce our enrollment and revenue and increase costs of operations.separate risk factor below.

The U.S. Congress must periodically reauthorize the Higher Education Act and other laws governing Title IV Programs and annually determines the funding level for each Title IV Program. On December 13, 2017,See Item 1, “Business—Student Financial Aid and Related Federal Regulation—Legislative Action and Recent Department Regulatory Initiatives,” for more information about the Committee on Education and the Workforce of the U.S. House of Representatives approved legislation to reauthorize the HEA. If enacted in its current form, this legislation would substantially amend the Higher Education Act, including but not limited to changes to Title IV Programs and provisions governing institutional participation therein. We cannot predict when or whether the full House of Representatives will vote on the legislation, nor when or whether similar legislation will be considered by the U.S. Senate. Furthermore, we cannot predict with any certainty the outcomereauthorization of the Higher Education Act reauthorization process norAct. In recent years, Congress, the extent to which any legislation, if adopted, could materially affect our business, financial conditionDepartment, states, accrediting agencies, the CFPB, the FTC, state attorneys general and results of operations. However, scrutiny ofthe media have scrutinized the for-profit postsecondary education sectorsector. See Item 1, “Business—Student Financial Aid and Related Federal Regulation—Scrutiny of the For-Profit Postsecondary Education Sector,” for more information about the focus on our industry. This scrutiny and the ongoing policy differences in Congress regarding spending levelsresults of the 2020 Presidential and Congressional elections could lead to significant regulatory changes in connection with the upcoming reauthorization of the Higher Education Act, and many of these changes may be adverse to postsecondary institutions generally or for-profit institutions specifically.

Additional ED or other rulemaking could materially and adversely affect our operations, business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.

ED has promulgated a substantial number of new regulations in recent yearsAct. The current Department administration is pursuing significant rule-making initiatives that impact our business, including but not limited to the “borrower defense to repayment” and gainful employment regulations discussed in the risk factors below, as well as compensation rules for persons engaged in certain aspects of admissions and financial aid, state authorization, determination of attendance and definitions of a “credit hour” and a “substantial misrepresentation” which became effective on July 1, 2011. These and other regulations have had significant impacts on our business, requiring a large number of reporting and operational changes and resulting in changes to and elimination of certain educational programs.  

In addition, on June 14, 2017, ED announced its intention to convene new negotiated rulemaking committees to consider modifications to the borrower defense to repayment regulations as well as the gainful employment regulation. ED has not established a final schedule for publication of proposed or final regulations; however any regulations published in final form by November 1, 2018 typically would take effect on July 1, 2019.

Future regulatory actions by ED or other agencies that regulate our institutions are likely to occur and to have significant impacts onnegatively impact our business, require us to change our business practices and incur costs of compliance and of developing and implementing changes in operations, as has been the case with past regulatory changes. We cannot predict with certainty the ultimate combined impact of the regulatory changes which have occurred over recent years, nor can we predict the effect of future legislative or regulatory action by federal, state or other agencies regulating our education programs or other aspects of our operations, how any resulting regulations will be interpreted or whether we and our institutions will be able to comply with these requirements in the future. Any such actions by legislative or regulatory bodies that affect our programs and operations could have a material adverse effect on our student population and our institutions, including the need to cease offering a number of programs.

ED’s gainful employment regulation may limit the programs we can offer students and increase our cost of operations.

Under the Higher Education Act, for-profit institutions are generally eligible to participate in Title IV Programs only in respect of educational programs that “prepare students for gainful employment in a recognized occupation.” On October 30, 2014, ED published a new complex final regulation to define “gainful employment,” a term used in the Higher Education Act which historically was not defined by Congress or ED. In addition to significant new disclosure requirements, the new regulation establishes debt to

24

earnings ratio thresholds a program’s students must achieve for the program to remain eligible to participate in Title IV Programs.business. See Item 1, “Business—Student Financial Aid and Related Federal Regulation—Compliance with FederalLegislative Action and Recent Department Regulatory Standards and Effect of Federal Regulatory Violations—Gainful Employment,Initiatives,” for more information aboutan overview of regulatory initiatives by the gainful employment regulation.Department.

On October 20, 2016, ED provided our institutions with their first program level draft debt-to-earnings rates under the new gainful employment regulation and in January 2017, ED finalized these rates. AIU had two, and CTU had three, of its continuing programsAs they have in the “zone” for meeting the gainful employment standard. Each university also had one program that failedpast, future regulatory changes may have significant impacts on our business, potentially requiring a large number of operational changes, changes to meet the standard; however, bothand elimination of these programs have ceased enrolling new students. The most significant of the continuing programs within our University Group that are in the zone are the Criminal Justice programs at AIU and CTU, which represent approximately 17% of University Group total enrollments at December 31, 2017. Our efforts to mitigate the impact of the regulation may not be successful or result in compliance with the new regulation. In particular, the continuing eligibility of ourcertain educational programs for Title IV Programs is at risk dueor other fundamental changes to factors beyond our control, such as changes in the actual or deemed income level of our graduates, changes in student borrowing levels, increases in interest rates, changes in the federal poverty income level relevant for calculating discretionary income, the Affordable Care Act’s incentive for businesses to reduce employee work schedules, pending immigration reform proposals and labor supply impacts on starting wages generally, changes in the percentage of our former students who are current in repayment of their student loans, and other factors. The exposure to these external factors couldbusiness. These actions may reduce our ability to continue certain types of programs for which there is market demand,student enrollments and therefore would impactprofitability or limit our ability to maintain or grow our business. Future regulatory changes may also make compliance with regulatory requirements more difficult.

In addition,We are dependent on the disclosurerenewal and reporting requirementsmaintenance of the new regulation increase our costs of operations and could adversely impact student enrollment and retention and the reputationTitle IV Programs.

A substantial majority of our institutions. If we are required to include a warning notice for any of our programs basedstudents rely on the debt-to-earnings rate, enrollment in those programs may decline materially.

On June 14, 2017, ED announced its intention to convene new negotiated rulemaking committees to consider modifications to the gainful employment regulation. Committee negotiations commenced in late 2017. ED has not established a final schedule for publication of proposed or final regulations; however, any regulations published in final form by November 1, 2018 typically would be effective on July 1, 2019. The outcome of these rulemaking initiatives and the impact of any new or modified regulations are uncertain at this time.

If a particular program ceased to be eligible for Title IV Programs to assist in most cases it would not be practical to continue offering that program underfinancing their education, and we derive a

23

substantial majority of our current business model, which could reduce our enrollmentrevenue and have a material adverse effect on our cash flows resultsfrom Title IV Programs. For example, for the year ended December 31, 2021, approximately 78% of operations and financial condition. Further, ifall our students who were in a program of study at any date during that year participated in Title IV Programs, which resulted in Title IV Program cash receipts of approximately $550 million. As a result, any legislative or regulatory action that significantly reduces Title IV Program funding or the ability of our programs require a warning notice or cease to be eligible for Title IV student financial aid, we may incur substantial cost and expense, and lost revenue, in providing appropriate assistance to the affected students to complete their academic programsparticipate, or transition to other programs inside or outside of our universities.

Recently adopted or modified “borrower defense to repayment” regulations may subject us tothat places significant repayment liability to ED for discharged federal student loans, posting of substantial letters of credit and other requirements that could have a material adverse effect on us.

On October 28, 2016, ED issued complex, significant new regulations that cover multiple issues including the processes and standards for the discharge of student loans, which are commonly referred to as “borrower defense to repayment.” Subsequently, in 2017, ED delayed the effective date of the regulations to permit ED to conclude negotiated rulemaking to replace the 2016 regulations and to provide adequate time for institutions to prepare for the implementation of any requirements resulting from the new negotiated rulemaking occurring in 2017-18. ED has not established a final schedule for publication of proposed or final regulations; however, any regulations published in final form by November 1, 2018 typically would take effect on July 1, 2019.

The 2016 borrower defense to repayment regulations set forth categories of borrower defenses that could be asserted by students with respect to student loans disbursedadditional burdens on or after July 1, 2017 and established an automatic discharge process associated with closed schools. In most cases, the 2016 regulations entitle ED to seek reimbursement from the institution for any loans discharged under new standards which are designed to be lenient and accommodating of student claims. The current negotiated rulemaking does not rely on the 2016 borrower defense to repayment regulations as a starting point and therefore may result in a different set of regulatory proposals, although similar topics and themes are being discussed.

We have in the past had claims made against us that if successfully made in the future could provide a basis for borrower claims for discharge of student loans. We cannot predict the extent to which any new regulation seeking recoupment from institutions for student loans that ED discharges may impact us.

The current negotiated rulemaking is also exploring whether, and the extent to which, modifications are appropriate to rules governing financial responsibility and administrative capability requirements that were in effect before the 2016 regulations. Both the 2016 borrower defense to repayment regulations and current negotiated rulemaking include discussion of triggering events that would provide ED broad discretion regarding periodic determinations of our financial responsibility and associated enhanced financial protection in the form of a letter of credit or other security it determines it needs. If in the future we are required to post a letter of credit pursuant to these new regulations, we may not have the capacity to do so. Even if we are able to post any required letter of

25

credit, doing so may impacteliminates our ability to make investments inparticipate, would materially reduce the number of students who enroll at our institutions, our revenue and our profitability, and we would be unable to continue our business which could have a material adverse effect onas it currently is conducted.

If our future growth prospects, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.  

We expectinstitutions become ineligible to experience additional administrative burdens associated with monitoring, reporting and disclosure obligationsparticipate in connection with the new regulations if they are not substantially modified, as well as responding to future claims for loan discharge, and these burdens may be material. Some aspects of the new regulations are unclear and many involve significant discretion by ED. Further, certain procedural aspects are pending future rulemaking by ED. The content of additional rulemaking and future interpretations of the regulations by ED are unknown andeducational assistance programs benefitting military or veteran personnel, it could have a material negative impact on the Company.student enrollments and could have other adverse consequences.

We cannot predict the impact the defense to repayment regulations, including any modifications thereto, will have on student enrollment, the volume of future claims for loan discharge, orSome students at our future financial responsibility as determined by ED, all of which could be materially adverse.

A failure to demonstrate "financial responsibility" or "administrative capability" would have negative impacts on our operations.

All higher education institutions participating in Title IV Programs must, among other things, satisfy financial and administrative standards. Failure to meet these standards will subject an institution to additional monitoring and reporting procedures, the costs of which may be significant; alterations in the timing and process for receipt of cashreceive education-related benefits pursuant to Title IV Programs; a requirement to submit an irrevocable letter of credit to ED in an amount equal to 10-100% of the Title IV Program fundsprograms for military or veteran personnel. If any decision is made that the institution received during its most recently completed fiscal year; or provisional certification for up to three years; depending on the level of compliance with the standards and ED’s discretion. See Item 1, “Business – Student Financial Aid and Related Federal Regulation – Compliance with Federal Regulatory Standards and Effect of Federal Regulatory Violations,” for more information about the standards of financial responsibility and administrative capability and the alternative ways an institution may establish eligibility to continue to participate in Title IV Programs.

If in the future we are required to satisfy ED's standards of financial responsibility on an alternative basis, including potentially by posting irrevocable letters of credit, we may not have the capacity to post these letters of credit.

Accreditor and state regulatory requirements also address financial responsibility, and these requirements vary among agencies and also are different from the ED requirements. Any developments relating toreduces our satisfaction of ED's financial responsibility requirements may lead to additional focus or review by our accreditors or applicable state agencies regarding their respective financial responsibility requirements.

If our institutions fail to maintain financial responsibility or administrative capability, they could lose theirinstitutions’ eligibility to participate in Title IV Programs, haveeducational assistance programs benefitting military or veteran personnel, and if appeals to that eligibility adversely conditioned or be subject to similar negative consequences under accreditor and state regulatory requirements, which would havedecision are not successful, we could experience a material adverse effect on our business. In particular, limitations on, or termination of, participationdecline in Title IV Programs as a result of the failure to demonstrate financial responsibility or administrative capability would limit students' access to Title IV Program funds, which would materially and adversely reduce thestudent enrollments and revenuesrevenue. In addition, a reduction in our students’ receipt of education assistance for military or veteran personnel would make it more difficult for our institutions.institutions to comply with the 90-10 Rule (discussed in the next risk factor).

Our institutions could lose their eligibility to participate in federal student financial aid programs or have other limitations placed upon them if the percentage of their revenues derived from those programs is too high.

Any of our institutions or OPEIDs may lose eligibility to participate in Title IV Programs if, on modified cash basis accounting, the percentage of the cash receipts derived from Title IV Programs for two consecutive fiscal years is greater than 90%. Under thethis 90-10 Rule, an OPEIDinstitution that derives more than 90% of its cash receipts from Title IV sources for a fiscal year will be placed on provisional participation status for its next two fiscal years. We have substantially no control over the amount of Title IV student loans and grants sought by or awarded to our students. In addition, if the OPEIDinstitution violates the 90-10 Rule and becomes ineligible to participate in Title IV Programs but continues to disburse Title IV Program funds, EDthe Department would require repayment of all Title IV Program funds received by it after the effective date of the loss of eligibility.

Several factors such as the increase in Title IV Program aid availability, including year-round Pell Grant funds, and budget-related reductions in state grant andprograms, workforce training programs and other alternative funding sources have adversely affected our institutions' 90-10 Rule percentages in recent years, and we expect this negative impact to continue. We have implemented various measures intended to reduce the percentage of our institution'sinstitutions’ cash basis revenue attributable to Title IV Program funds, but they have had only limited impactincluding efforts to datediversify the sources of our revenue and, theyin some prior years, managing our cash flow within the parameters permitted by Department cash management regulations. However, these measures may not beadequate to prevent our institutions' 90-10 Rule percentages from exceeding 90% in the future. One such measure is delaying the disbursement and subsequent receipt of Title IV Program funds. Another is adjusting tuition, which could adversely affect our enrollment and our cohort default rates.

The ability of our institutions to maintaincomply with the 90-10 rates below 90%Rule will depend on the impactcomposition of our future changes in our enrollment mixstudent population and their personal circumstances and on regulatory and other factors outside of our control, including any reduction in government education assistance for military and veteran personnel, including veterans, or changes in the treatment of such funding for purposes of the 90-10 rate calculation. In addition, there is a lack of clarity regarding some of the technical aspects of the calculation methodology under the 90-10 Rule, which may lead to regulatory action or investigations by ED. Changesthe Department or other government bodies.

Currently, government education assistance for military and veteran personnel, is not treated as revenue from Title IV sources and therefore is included in or new interpretationsthe “10%” portion of the calculation methodology or other industry practices undercalculation. In March 2021, legislation was enacted which included a modification to the 90-10 Rule could further significantly impact our compliance withthat alters the measurement under the rule from the percentage of Title IV Program tuition revenue an institution receives to the percentage of “federal educational assistance” an institution receives. While the required ratio to maintain Title IV Program eligibility will remain at below 90%, specific details on the modified rule and what constitutes “federal educational assistance” are being determined pursuant to a negotiated rulemaking process. The Department is proposing to revise the 90-10 Rule to consider government education assistance for military and any review or investigation by ED involving usveteran personnel in the same manner as Title IV funds as part of the negotiated rulemaking process. This and other proposed changes to the 90-10 Rule would make it more difficult to comply with the rule and we may be required to alter the manner in which we conduct our business in order to preserve our students’ ability to benefit from financial assistance for their education pursuant to Title IV Programs. Any necessary business changes could require a significant amount of resources.materially impact our revenue, operating costs and opportunities for growth. Furthermore, these business changes could make more difficult our ability to comply with other important regulatory requirements, such as the cohort default rate regulations.

26

ED hasThe Department may have broad discretion to impose additional sanctions on institutions that fail the 90-10 Rule limit, but there is only limited precedent available to predict what those additional sanctions might be in the future. EDThe Department could specify a wide range of additional conditions as part of the provisional certification and the institutions' continued participation in Title IV Programs. These conditions may include, among other things, restrictions on the total amount of Title IV Program funds that may be distributed to students attending the institutions; restrictions on programmatic and geographic expansion; requirements to obtain and post letters of credit; and additional reporting requirements to include additional interim financial or enrollment reporting.

See Item 1, “Business – Student Financial Aid and Related Federal Regulation – Compliance with Federal Regulatory Standards and Effect of Federal Regulatory Violations - ‘90-10 Rule,’” for more information about the 90-10 Rule and the measures we have implemented to improve our compliance.

24

If any of our institutions lose eligibility to participate in Title IV Programs due to violation of the current or modified 90-10 Rule, such institutions' operatingthe institution would experience a dramatic decline in revenue and financial results would be materially adversely affected.unable to continue its business as it currently is conducted. Efforts to reduce the 90-10 Rule percentage for our institutions have and may in the future involve taking measures that reduce our revenue, increase our operating expenses or involve interpretations of the 90-10 Rule or other Title IV regulations that are without clear precedent reduce our revenue or increase our operating expenses (or all of the foregoing, in each case perhaps significantly).

“Borrower defense to repayment” regulations, including closed school discharges, may subject us to significant repayment liability to the Department for discharged federal student loans and posting of substantial letters of credit that may limit our ability to make investments in our business which could negatively impact our future growth.

On October 28, 2016, the Department adopted regulations that cover multiple issues including the processes and standards for the discharge of student loans, which are commonly referred to as “borrower defense to repayment” regulations. Included in the 2016 regulations were expansions of the Department’s authority to process group discharge claims and authority to seek recoupment from institutions. On September 23, 2019, the Department published new final “borrower defense to repayment” regulations that became effective on July 1, 2020. The processes and standards that apply are determined by the date a student loan is disbursed, and student loans disbursed before July 1, 2017 will follow the Department’s original discharge standards and processes that specify that a borrower may assert a defense to repayment based on an act or omission by the school that would give rise to a cause of action under state law. Further changes to the borrower defense to repayment regulations are being considered and the Department has expressed a goal of making it easier for students to have their loans discharged and an intention to make it easier to seek recovery of discharged loan funds from institutions.

In May 2021, the Department notified us of several thousand borrower defense applications that make claims regarding our institutions, including institutions that have ceased operations. Despite our belief expressed in initial responses submitted to the Department that the applications fail to establish a valid borrower defense and the Department should therefore deny them, the Department may grant the applications and assert repayment claims against us regardless of the date the student loan was disbursed and the corresponding discharge standards and processes. Our defenses to the asserted repayment liability may not succeed. See Item 1, “Business – Student Financial Aid and Related Federal Regulation – Compliance with Federal Regulatory Standards and Effect of Federal Regulatory Violations – Borrower Defense to Repayment,” for more information about the borrower defense to repayment regulations and our responses to these applications.

In addition to discharge of student loans based on an act or omission by a school, Department regulations provide that upon the closure of an institution participating in the Title IV Programs, including any location thereof, certain students who had attended such an institution or location may be eligible to obtain a “closed school discharge” of their federal student loans related to attendance at that institution or location, if they do not complete their educational programs at another location or online, or through transfer or teach-out with other postsecondary institutions. In order to obtain a closed school discharge, a student generally must have been enrolled or on an approved leave of absence when the institution or location closed. The Department’s regulations historically also provide that students who withdraw from an institution or location within 120 days prior to the closure may receive a closed school discharge; this time period was expanded to 180 days under the 2019 borrower defense to repayment regulations. Additionally, under the 2016 regulations, the Department may grant automatic closed school discharges to students who do not re-enroll in another Title IV-participating institution within three years after becoming unable to complete their educational program due to a closure of their institution or institutional location. Recently, the Department has asserted loan discharge claims against us relating to closed campuses in our former All Other Campuses reporting segment for select students that withdrew or were dismissed from school just prior to a campus closure, despite the availability of a teach-out and opportunity to complete. In addition, pursuant to our acquisition of substantially all of the assets of Trident University, Trident University’s operations were brought within the scope of AIUS’ state licensure, accreditation and Department approval, with Trident University relinquishing its accreditor and Department approvals. As a result, we may incur closed school discharge liabilities if Trident University students do not complete their educational program after the closing of the transaction.

The Department’s interpretation and enforcement of the different versions of the borrower defense to repayment regulations and the related processes and standards is uncertain, and the change in Department administration and policy objectives under the current Presidential administration is likely to lead to additional rule modifications regarding borrower defense to repayment and changes in the loan discharge process applicable to outstanding claims.  For example, on February 16, 2022, the Department announced that nearly 16,000 borrowers will receive $415 million in borrower defense to repayment discharges following the approval of four new findings and the continued review of claims. This includes approximately 1,800 former DeVry University students who will receive approximately $71.7 million in full borrower defense discharges, with the Department anticipating an increase in these amounts.  DeVry University is a for-profit postsecondary institution, and the Department noted in its announcement that these are the first approved borrower defense claims associated with a currently operating institution and that it will seek to recoup the cost of the discharges from DeVry University. If the 90-10 Rule is not changedDepartment determines that a significant number of borrowers who attended our current, former or acquired institutions have a defense to provide relief for for-profit institutions,repayment of their student loans, we could be subject to significant repayment liability to the Department, which may be requiredlimit our ability to make structural changes to our business to remaininvestments in compliance, which changes may materially alter the manner in which we conduct our business and materially and adverselynegatively impact our business,future growth.

In addition to potential liability associated with loan discharges, both the 2016 and 2019 borrower defense to repayment regulations include discussion of triggering events that may provide the Department discretion regarding periodic determinations of

25

our financial condition, resultsresponsibility and associated enhanced financial protection in the form of operations and cash flows. Furthermore, thesea letter of credit or other security it determines it needs. If in the future we are required changes could make more difficultto post a letter of credit pursuant to the borrower defense to repayment regulations, we may not have the capacity to do so. Even if we are able to post any required letter of credit, doing so may limit our ability to complymake investments in our business which could negatively impact our future growth.

We cannot predict the impact various defense to repayment regulations will have on student enrollments, the volume of claims for loan discharge (including closed school discharge), the amount of claims for loan discharge the Department approves, the amount of discharged loans the Department asserts we have repayment liability for, or our future financial responsibility as determined by the Department, all of which could be materially adverse to our business.

A failure to demonstrate "financial responsibility" or "administrative capability" would have negative impacts on our operations.

All higher education institutions participating in Title IV Programs must, among other things, satisfy financial and administrative standards. Failure to meet these standards may subject an institution to (1) additional monitoring and reporting procedures, the costs of which may be significant, (2) alterations in the timing and process for receipt of cash pursuant to Title IV Programs, (3) a requirement to submit an irrevocable letter of credit to the Department in an amount equal to 10-100% of the Title IV Program funds received during its most recently completed fiscal year, which we not have the capacity to provide, or (4) provisional certification for up to three years, in each case depending on the level of compliance with other importantthe standards and the Department’s discretion. See Item 1, “Business – Student Financial Aid and Related Federal Regulation – Compliance with Federal Regulatory Standards and Effect of Federal Regulatory Violations,” for more information.

Accreditor and state regulatory requirements suchalso address financial responsibility, and these requirements vary among agencies and also are different from Department requirements. Any developments relating to our satisfaction of the Department's financial responsibility requirements may lead to additional focus or review by our accreditors or applicable state agencies regarding their respective financial responsibility requirements.

If our institutions fail to maintain financial responsibility or administrative capability, they could lose their eligibility to participate in Title IV Programs, have that eligibility adversely conditioned or be subject to similar negative consequences under accreditor and state regulatory requirements, which would have a material adverse effect on our operations. In particular, limitations on participation in Title IV Programs as a result of the cohort default rate regulations.failure to demonstrate financial responsibility or administrative capability could materially reduce the enrollments and revenue at the impacted institution, and atermination of participation would cause a dramatic decline in revenue and we would be unable to continue our business as it currently is conducted.

Our institutions could lose their eligibility to participate in federal student financial aid programs or have other limitations placed upon them if their student loan cohort default rates are greater than the standards set by ED.the Department.

To remain eligible to participate in Title IV Programs, our institutions must maintain student loan cohort default rates below specified levels. Each cohort is the group of students who first enter into student loan repayment during a federal fiscal year (ending September 30). The applicable cohort default rate for each cohort is the percentage of the students in the cohort who default on their student loans prior to the end of the two following federal fiscal years, which represents a three-year measuring period. If an educational institution’s cohort default rate exceeds the applicable standards, it may be required to delay for 30 days the release of the first disbursement of U.S. federal student loan proceeds to first time borrowers, establish a default prevention task force and develop a default prevention plan with measurable objectives for improving the cohort default rate, be subject to provisional certification imposing various additional requirements for participating in Title IV Programs or, depending on the duration or magnitude of the compliance failure, cease participation in Title IV Programs.

See Item 1, “Business – Student Financial Aid and Related Federal Regulation – Compliance with Federal Regulatory Standards and Effect of Federal Regulatory Violations – Student Loan Default Rates,” for more information about cohort default rates, ED’sthe Department’s standards and penalties applicable thereto, as well as the Company’s rates for its institutions.our institutions and how the CARES Act could negatively impact our rates in the future.

If anyeither of our institutions were to loseloses eligibility to participate in Title IV Programs due to student loan default rates being higher than ED’sthe Department’s thresholds, we would experience a dramatic decline in revenue and we would be unable to continue our business as it currently is conducted.

Our agreements with multiple state attorneys general and the FTC may lead to unexpected impacts on our student enrollments or higher than anticipated expenses, a failure to comply may lead to additional enforcement actions and continued scrutiny may result in additional costs or new enforcement actions.

As discussed above, states and other regulatory bodies have increased their focus on the for-profit postsecondary education sector. This includes increased activity by state attorneys general and the FTC in their review of the sector. In recent years, we entered into various agreements with state attorneys general and the FTC to bring closure to inquiries by them. See Item 1, “Business – Accreditation, State Regulation and Other Compliance Matters – Other Compliance Matters” for information about these agreements. These agreements could not arrange for adequate alternative student financing sources, we would most likelyultimately have to close those institutions,negative impacts on our business, any one of which could be material. For example, pursuant to the 2019 agreements with the attorneys general we agreed to work with a third-party administrator that will report annually for three years on our compliance with various obligations under these agreements. Any negative findings by the third-party administrator may result in negative consequences to us, such as an extension of the time period during which we must work with the third-party

26

administrator or an action by one or more attorneys general seeking enforcement of the agreements. Further, our provision of materials and information in accordance with the terms of the agreements that do not align with those provided by other institutions could negatively impact student decisions to enroll or remain enrolled at our institutions.Pursuant to the agreement with the FTC, we agreed to various operating provisions including the operation of a system to monitor lead aggregators and generators involving a compliance review by, or on behalf of, the Company of the various sources a prospective student interacts with prior to the Company’s purchase and use of the prospective student lead. The compliance costs related to these agreements may be greater than anticipated and may have a material adverse effectnegative impact on our totalability to compete effectively and maintain and grow student enrollment, financial condition,enrollments at our institutions, and a failure to comply may lead to additional enforcement actions by the state attorneys general and the FTC. In addition, we continue to receive requests from state and other regulatory bodies to provide ongoing proof that we are complying with applicable law and regulations and meeting our contractual obligations pursuant to these agreements. Compliance with these requests results of operationsin significant additional costs and cash flows.a failure to respond, whether required or not, could result in additional enforcement actions.

If EDthe Department denies, or significantly conditions, recertification of anyeither of our institutions to participate in Title IV Programs, that institution could not conduct its business as it is currently conducted.

Under the provisions of the Higher Education Act, an institution must apply to EDthe Department for continued certification to participate in Title IV Programs at least every six years or when it undergoes a change of control. Each institution is assigned an identification number by ED known as an OPEID, or Office of Postsecondary Education Identification number, with each institution’s branches and additional locations assigned to the main campus’ OPEID. Generally, the recertification process includes a review by EDthe Department of an institution’s educational programs and locations, administrative capability, financial responsibility and other oversight categories. All of our institutions, including AIU and CTU, areAIUS is currently operating on a provisional program participation agreement. AIU and CTU each have a program participation agreement that expires on September 30, 2018.due to open regulatory review processes with the Department at the time of the renewal. During the period of provisional certification, our institutionsan institution must obtain prior EDDepartment approval to add an educational program, open a new location or make any other significant change, which could negatively impact our ability to take these actions.

The most recent provisional program participation agreements distributed to CTU and AIU in July and August 2017, respectively, provided that they were provisional because of matters relating toIf the Assurance of Discontinuance the Company entered into in August 2013 with the New York Attorney General (see Item 1, “Business—Accreditation and Jurisdictional Authorizations—Additional State Regulatory Matters”), inquiries from various state attorneys general (see Note 11 “Contingencies—State Investigations” to our consolidated financial statements), student complaints and, with respect to AIU, an open ED program review. It is uncertain what impact, if any, these matters and the existing provisional certification status of AIU and CTU may have on their recertification process later this year.

27

If EDDepartment finds that any of our institutions do not fully satisfy all required eligibility and certification standards, EDthe Department could limit, suspend or terminate the institution’s participation in Title IV Programs. Continued Title IV program eligibility is critical to the operation of our business. If either of our institutions becomebecomes ineligible to participate in Title IV Programs, or have that participation significantly conditioned, weit could not conduct ourits business as it is currently conducted and itwe would haveexperience a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.dramatic decline in revenue.

Government and regulatory agencies and third parties may conduct compliance reviews and audits or bring actions against us that could resultOur institutions would lose their ability to participate in monetary liabilities, injunctions, loss of eligibility for Title IV Programs if they fail to maintain their institutional accreditation, and our student enrollments could decline if certain of our programs fail to obtain or other adverse outcomes.maintain programmatic accreditation.

Because we operateAn institution must be accredited by an accrediting agency recognized by the Department in order to participate in Title IV Programs. See Item 1, “Business – Accreditation, Jurisdictional Authorizations and Other Compliance Matters – Institutional Accreditation.” The failure to comply with accreditation standards will subject an institution to additional oversight and reporting requirements, accreditation proceedings such as a highly regulated industry, weshow-cause directive, an action to defer or deny action related to an institution's application for a new grant of accreditation or an action to suspend an institution's accreditation or a program's approval. Future inquiries or actions by state or federal agencies could impact our accreditation status. If our institutions or programs are subject to complianceaccreditation actions or are placed on probationary accreditation status, we may experience adverse publicity, impaired ability to attract and retain students and substantial expense to obtain unqualified accreditation status. The inability to obtain reaccreditation following periodic reviews and audits as well as claimsor any final loss of noncompliance and lawsuits by government agencies, regulatory agencies and third parties. In this regard, we have several pending audits, inquiries and claims against us, including ED’s Office of Inspector General audit of CTU and inquiries from ED and various other regulators. See Note 11 "Contingencies" to our consolidated financial statements and Item I, “Business – Student Financial Aid and Related Federal Regulation – Compliance with Federal Regulatory Standards and Effect of Federal Regulatory Violations” for discussion of certain of these pending matters.

It is possible for one or more of our employees to engage in non-compliant behavior or make statements that violate some aspectinstitutional accreditation after exhaustion of the extensive regulations governing our institutions and business despite our compliance programs. We have undertaken significant personnel and cost reductions to stabilize our business which could create resource constraints that may increase the likelihood of a compliance failure. From time to time, we identify compliance deficiencies that we must address and, where appropriate, report such deficiencies to ED. Such reporting, even in regard to a minor or inadvertent compliance issue, couldadministrative agency processes would result in a more significant compliance review by ED or even a full recertification review, which may require the expenditure of substantial administrative time and resources to address.

If the result of any pending or future proceeding is unfavorable to us, we may be required to pay money damages or be subject to fines, limitations, loss of Title IV funding, injunctionsProgram funds for the affected institution and its students. In addition, if an accrediting body of our institutions loses recognition by the Department, that institution could lose its ability to participate in Title IV Programs.

Many states and professional associations require professional programs to be accredited. While programmatic accreditation is not a sufficient basis to qualify for institutional Title IV Program certification, programmatic accreditation may improve employment opportunities for program graduates in their chosen field. Those of our programs that do not have such programmatic accreditation, where available, or fail to maintain such accreditation, may experience adverse publicity, declining enrollments, litigation or other penalties. Even if we adequately address issues raised by an agency reviewclaims from students or successfully defend a lawsuit or claim, we may havesuffer other adverse impacts, which could result in it being impractical for us to divert significant financial and management resources from our ongoing business operations to address issues raised by those actions. Claims and lawsuits brought against us may damage our reputation or adversely affect our stock price, even ifcontinue offering such actions are eventually determined to be without merit.programs.

We need timely approval by applicable regulatory agencies to offer new programs or make substantive changes to existing programs.

We believeOur institutions frequently need to obtain approvals from regulatory agencies are generally seeing significant increases in the volumeconduct of requests as a result of the industry adjustingtheir business. For example, to the significant volume of new regulations and challenging economic circumstances which have affected students and institutions. Regulatory capacity constraints have at times resulted in delays to various approvals our institutions are requesting. To establish a new educational program or substantive changes to existing programs, we are required to obtain the appropriate approvals from EDthe Department and applicable state and accrediting regulatory agencies. Staffing levels at the Department and other regulatory agencies which and the volume of applications and other requests may delay our receipt of necessary approvals. Further, approvals may be conditioned delayed or denied in a manner that could significantly affect our strategic plans and future growth. Approval by these regulatory agencies may also be negatively impacted due to regulatory inquiries or reviews and any adverse publicity relating to such matters or the industry generally. Also, the threat of any adverse action by ED regarding its recognition of any of our accrediting agencies may impact the timing of our accrediting agencies' review and decision whether to grant approval of our various requests, in particular in areas of current focus by ED.

27

Risks Related to Our Business

Our financial performance depends on the level of student enrollmentenrollments in our institutions.

Stagnant wage growth and heightened financial worries could continue to affect the willingness of students to incur loans to pay for postsecondary education and to pursue postsecondary education in general. An improving economy and improving job prospects may lead prospective students to choose to work rather than to pursue postsecondary education. Our enrollments could suffer from any of these circumstances.

Enrollment of students at our institutions is impacted by many of the regulatory risks discussed above and business risks discussed below, many of which are beyond our control. IfWe also believe that the costslevel of Title IV loans increaseour student enrollments is affected by changes in economic conditions, although the nature and if availabilitymagnitude of alternate student financial aid decreases,this effect are uncertain and may change over time. For example, during periods when the unemployment rate declines or remains stable, prospective students may decide nothave more employment options, leading them to enrollchoose to work rather than to pursue postsecondary education. On the other hand, high unemployment rates may affect the willingness of students to incur loans to pay for postsecondary education or to pursue postsecondary education in general.

Affordability concerns and negative perception of the value of a postsecondary institution, including our institutions. college degree increase reluctance to take on debt and make it more challenging for us to attract and retain students. We couldmay experience decreasing enrollments in our institutions due to changing demographic trends in family size, overall declines in enrollment in postsecondary institutions, job growth in fields unrelated to our core disciplines immigration and visa laws, or other societal factors. Further, we continue to make investments in and changes to our business which are designed to improve student experiences, retention and academic outcomes and support the long-term sustainable and responsible growth of our institutions. These initiative may not be successful or the success of these initiatives may reduce over time.  

We believe the prolonged COVID-19 pandemic has impacted overall student engagement and we expect total student enrollments to be impacted in the short-term. Some students have paused their academic programs or deferred their decision to begin classes. The duration of this change in student behavior and any long-term impact on total student enrollments is uncertain.

Our student enrollments could suffer from any of these circumstances. It is likely that legislative, regulatory, and economic uncertainties will continue, and thus it is difficult to assess our long-term growth prospects. Reduced enrollments at our institutions, for any of the reasons mentioned or otherwise, generally reducesreduce our profitability, and is likely to have a negative impact on our business, results of operation, financial condition and cash flows, which, depending on the level of the decline, could be material.

28

We compete with a variety of educational institutions, especially in the online education market, and if we are unable to compete effectively, our total student enrollmentenrollments and revenue could be adversely impacted.

The postsecondary education industry is highly fragmented and increasingly competitive. Our institutions compete with traditional public and private two-year and four-year colleges and universities, other for-profit institutions, other online education providers, and alternatives to higher education, such as immediate employment and military service. Some public and private institutions charge lower tuition for courses of study similar to those offered by our institutions due, in part, to government subsidies, government and foundation grants, tax-deductible contributions and other financial resources not available to for-profit institutions, and this competition may increase if additional subsidies or resources become available to those institutions. For example, a typical community college is subsidized by local or state government and, as a result, tuition rates for associate’s degree programs aremay be much lower at community colleges than at our institutions. Several states have adopted or proposed programs to enable residents to attend community colleges for free.Our

Some of our competitors mayare more widely known and have substantially greater brand recognition and financial and other resourcesmore established reputations than we have or may beour institutions. In addition, some of our competitors are subject to fewer regulatory burdens on enrollment and financial aid processes, which may enable them to compete more effectively for potential students. In particular, some of our publicly traded for-profit competitors have converted to a structure where a for-profit service company provides services to a non-profit educational institution, which reduces the impact of certain regulations on their operations, such as the 90-10 Rule.

We also expect to experience increased competition as more postsecondary education providers increase their online program offerings (in particular programs that are geared towards the needs of working adults), including traditional and community colleges that had not previously offered online education programs, and increase their use of personalized learning technologies. This trend has been accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic and companies that provide and/or manage online learning platforms for traditional colleges and community colleges. Increased competition may create greater pricing or operating pressure on us, which could have a material adverse effect on our institutions' enrollments, revenues and profit margins. We may also face increased competition in maintaining and developing new corporate partnerships and other relationships with employers, particularly as employers become more selective as to which online universities they will encourage or offer scholarships to their employees to attend and from which online universities they will hire prospective employees.

Congress, the Department and other agencies have required increasing disclosure of information to prospective students (with some disclosures only required by for-profit institutions), and our agreements with multiple state attorneys general require additional disclosures that are not required by our competitors. Some of these disclosures may negatively impact a prospective student’s decision to enroll in one of our institutions.

An increase in competition, couldparticularly from traditional colleges with well-established reputations for excellence, may affect the success of our recruiting efforts to enroll and retain students who are likely to succeed in our educational programs, or cause us to

28

reduce our tuition rates and increase our marketing and other recruiting expenses, which could adversely impact our profitability and cash flows.

Our financial performance depends on our ability to develop awareness among, and enroll and retain, students in our institutions and programs in a cost effectivecost-effective manner.

If our institutions are unable to successfully market and advertise their educational programs, our institutions' ability to attract and enroll prospective students in those programs could be adversely affected. We have been investing in newour student admissions and advising centers near Phoenix, Arizona,functions and other initiatives to improve student experiences, retention and academic outcomes. If these initiatives do not continue to succeed, our ability to attract, enroll and retain students in our programs could be adversely affected. Further, Internet and other technology, including data gathering and marketing and advertising, is changing fast and we may be unable to adapt our initiatives to attract, enroll and retain students in a timely manner. Consequently, our ability to increase revenue or maintain profitability could be impaired. Some of the factors that could prevent us from successfully marketing our institutions and the programs that they offer include, but are not limited to: student or employer dissatisfaction with our educational programs and services; diminished access to prospective students; our failure to maintain or expand our brand names or other factors related to our marketing or advertising practices; FTC or Federal Communications Commission restrictions on contacting prospective students, Internet, mobile phone and other advertising and marketing media; costs and effectiveness of Internet, mobile phone and other advertising programs; and changing media preferences of our target audiences. In addition, we

We use third-party lead aggregators and generators to help us identify potentialprospective students. The practices of some lead aggregators and generators have been questioned by various regulatory bodies, which could lead to changes in the quality and number of theprospective student leads provided by these lead aggregators and generators as well as the cost thereof, which could in turn result in a reduction in the number of students we enroll.Further, the highly regulated nature of the postsecondary education industry and the resulting compliance measures undertaken by the industry are burdensome and some lead aggregators may choose not to work with us in favor of providing their services to different industries. In addition, the number of lead aggregators and generators has reduced over time due to consolidation in that industry, and this could exaggerate the indirect impact on us of any negative developments within that industry or with respect to any lead aggregator or generator with which we do business.

We may not be able to retain our key personnel or hire, train and retain the personnel we need to sustain and grow our business.

Our future success depends largely on the skills, efforts and motivation of our executive officers and other key personnel, as well as on our ability to attract and retain qualified managers and our institutions' ability to attract and retain qualified faculty members and administrators. If any of our executive officers leave the Company, it may be difficult to hire a replacement with similar experience and skills due to the highly regulated nature of our business. The political and regulatory uncertainty facing the for-profit postsecondary education industry may make it difficult to retain key personnel, in particular long-tenured senior officers. Loss of key personnel in the future could impact our growth, lead to changes in or create uncertainty about our business strategies or otherwise impact management's attention to operations.  

Our success and ability to grow depends on the ability to hire, train and retain significant numbers of talented people. We face competition from companies in postsecondary education and other industries in attracting, hiring and retaining personnel who possess the combination of skills and experiences that we seek to implement our business strategy. In particular, our performance is dependent upon the availability and retention of qualified personnel for our student support operations. The negative publicity surrounding our industry sometimes makes it difficult and more expensive to attract, hire and retain qualified and experienced personnel, and the Department’s regulations related to incentive compensation affect our ability to compensate admissions and financial aid personnel. Our ability to effectively train our student support personnel and the length of time it takes them to become productive also impacts our results of operations. In addition, as a result of the overall tightening of the labor market and the competitive world for quality employees that has emerged during the pandemic, we have had increasing difficulty in filling our open positions. This may result in additional costs in the future as we are required to provide increased compensation in order to attract and retain qualified employees.

Regulatory changes impacting the for-profit postsecondary education sector may require us to make substantial changes to our business and explore alternative business strategies to maintain or grow our business. If our executive officers and other key personnel lack experience necessary to support these changes, we may be unable to timely attract the talent that we need.

Key personnel may leave us and subsequently compete against us after any period they are contractually obligated not to pursue such activities. The loss of the services of our key personnel, or our failure to attract, train and retain other qualified and experienced personnel on acceptable terms and in a timely manner could adversely affect our results of operations and growth prospects.

Our financial performance depends, in part, on our ability to keep pace with changing market needs and technology.

Increasingly, prospective employers of students who graduate from our institutions demand that their new employees possess appropriate technological skills and also appropriate “soft” skills, such as communication, critical thinking and teamwork skills. These desired skills can evolve rapidly in a changing economic and technological environment, so it is important for our institutions’ educational programs to evolve in response to those economic and technological changes. Current or prospective students or the employers of our graduates may not accept expansion of our existing programs, improved program content and the development of new programs. Students and faculty increasingly rely on personal communication devices and expect that we will be able to adapt our

29

information technology platforms and our educational delivery methods to support these devices and any new technologies that may develop. Even if our institutions are able to develop acceptable new and improved programs in a cost-effective manner, our institutions may not be able to begin offering them as quickly as prospective students and employers would like or as quickly as our competitors offer similar programs. If we are unable to successfully resolve pendingadequately respond to changes in market requirements due to regulatory or future litigationfinancial constraints, rapid technological changes or other factors, our ability to attract and regulatoryretain students could be impaired and governmental inquiries involving us, or face increased regulatory actions or litigation, our financial conditionrevenue and results of operationsprofitability could be adversely affected.

From time to time, we and certain of our current and former directors and executive officers are named as defendants in various lawsuits, investigations and claims covering a range of matters, including, but not limited to, violations of the federal securities laws, breaches of fiduciary duty and claims made by current and former students and employees of our institutions. Claims have included qui tam actions filed in federal court by individual plaintiffs on behalf of themselves and the federal government alleging violations of the False Claims Act. Qui tam actions are filed under seal, and remain under seal until the government decides whether it will intervene in the case. If the government elects to intervene in an action, it assumes primary control of that matter; if the government elects not to intervene, then individual plaintiffs may continue the litigation at their own expense on behalf of the government. See Note 11 "Contingencies" to our consolidated financial statements for discussion of several current matters. Additional actions may arise in the future.

We and our institutions also are subject to and have pending audits, compliance reviews, inquiries, investigations, claims of non-compliance and litigation by ED, federal and state regulatory agencies, accrediting agencies, state attorney general offices, present and former students and employees, and others that may allege violations of statutes, regulations, accreditation standards, consumer protection and other legal and regulatory requirements applicable to us or our institutions. For example, we have received inquiries from attorneys general in 21 states plus the District of Columbia, including a collective inquiry by 18 attorneys general relating to potential non-compliance with applicable state laws and regulations by certain of our institutions. See Note 11 "Contingencies" to our consolidated financial statements and Item 1, “Business – Student Financial Aid and Related Federal Regulation – Compliance with Federal Regulatory Standards and Effect of Federal Regulatory Violations” for additional discussion of these and certain other current matters. If the results of any such audits, reviews, inquiries, investigations, claims, or actions are unfavorable to us, we may be required to pay monetary damages or be subject to fines, operational limitations, loss of federal funding, injunctions, undertakings, additional oversight and reporting, or other civil or criminal penalties.

Even if we maintain compliance with applicable governmental and accrediting body regulations, regulatory scrutiny or adverse

29

publicity arising from allegations of non-compliance may increase our costs of regulatory compliance and adversely affect our financial results, growth rates and prospects. For example, Congressional hearings and the continuing state attorneys general, CFPB and FTC investigations affecting for-profit institutions may spur plaintiffs’ law firms or others to initiate additional litigation against us and other for-profit education providers.

We are subject to a variety of other claims and litigation that arise from time to time alleging non-compliance with or violations of state or federal regulatory matters including, but not limited to, claims involving students, graduates and employees. In the event the extensive changes in the overall federal and state regulatory construct results in additional statutory or regulatory bases for these types of matters, or other events result in more of such claims or unfavorable outcomes to such claims, there exists the possibility of a material adverse impact on our business, reputation, financial position, cash flows and results of operations for the periods in which the effects of any such matter or matters becomes probable and reasonably estimable. In addition, proposals have been made to limit the use of pre-dispute resolution clauses and class action waivers in student enrollments agreements. Implementation of these initiatives may result in increased litigation costs.

We cannot predict the ultimate outcome of these and future matters and expect to continue to incur significant defense costs and other expenses in connection with them. We may be required to pay substantial damages or settlement costs in excess of our insurance coverage related to these matters. Government investigations, including the pending state attorneys general investigations in which we are involved, and any related legal and administrative proceedings may result in the institution of administrative, civil injunctive or criminal proceedings against us and/or our current or former directors, officers or employees, or the imposition of significant fines, penalties or suspensions, or other remedies and sanctions. Any such costs and expenses could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations and the market price of our common stock.

Our future financial condition and results of operations could be materially adversely affected if we are required to write down the carrying value of non-financial assets and non-financial liabilities, including long-lived assets, deferred tax assets and goodwill and intangible assets, such as our trade names.goodwill.

In accordance with U.S. GAAP, we review our non-financial assets and non-financial liabilities, including goodwill and indefinite-lived intangible assets, such as our trade names, for impairment on at least an annual basis through the application of fair value-based measurements. On an interim basis, we review our assets and liabilities to determine if a triggering event had occurred that would result in it being more likely than not that the fair value would be less than the carrying amount for any of our reporting units or indefinite-lived intangible assets. Some factors that management considers when determining if a triggering event has occurred include reviewing the significant inputs to the fair value calculation and any events or circumstances that could affect the significant inputs, including, but not limited to, financial performance, legal, regulatory, contractual, competitive, economic, political, business or other factors, industry and market conditions as well as the most recent quantitative fair value analysis for each reporting unit and the amount of the difference between the estimated fair value and the carrying value. We determine the fair value of our reporting units using a combination of an income approach, based on discounted cash flow, and a market-based approach. To the extent the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount, we maywill be required to record an impairment charge in the consolidated statements of (loss) income and comprehensive (loss) income. We determine the fair value of our trade names using a relief from royalty method which is based on the assumption that, in lieu of ownership of an intangible asset, a company would be willing to pay a royalty in order to enjoy the benefits of the asset. To the extent the fair value of the trade name is less than its carrying amount, we record an impairment charge in the consolidated statements of (loss) income and comprehensive (loss) income. Our estimates of fair value for these are based primarily on projected future results and expected cash flows consistent with our plans to manage the underlying businesses, including projections of newly acquired businesses.However, should we encounter unexpected economic conditions or operational results, have unforeseen complications with integration of newly acquired businesses or need to take additional actions not currently foreseen to comply with current and future regulations, the assumptions used to calculate the fair value of our assets, estimate of future cash flows, revenue growth, and discount rates, could be negatively impacted and could result in an impairment of goodwill or other long-lived assets which could materially adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

Furthermore, we believe that our evaluation of deferred tax assets and the need for a valuation allowance against such assets involve critical accounting estimates because they are subject to, among other things, estimates of future taxable income and future changes in the effective corporate tax rate. These estimates are susceptible to change and are dependent on events that may or may not occur. Our assessment of the need for or release of a valuation allowance is material to the assets reported on our consolidated balance sheets and changes in any of the assumptions utilized in this assessment could result in an increase or decrease to the valuation allowance recorded as of December 31, 2017. As of December 31, 2017, we have recorded a partial valuation allowance in the amount of $50.5 million related to that portion of our deferred tax assets which we determined were not more likely than not to be realized based upon the existing positive and negative evidence. Future changes in circumstances that cause a change in judgment about the realizability of the deferred tax asset could result in an increase or decrease to the valuation allowance recorded within the consolidated balance sheet in future periods and could cause our income tax provision to vary significantly among financial reporting periods.

The loss of our key personnel could harm us.

Our future success depends largely on the skills, efforts and motivation of our executive officers and other key personnel, as well as on our ability to attract and retain qualified managers and our institutions' ability to attract and retain qualified faculty members and administrators. Many leadership positions within the Company have been transitioned over recent years. This includes several changes in the offices of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer. These transitions and loss of key personnel in the future could slow implementation of key initiatives, lead to changes in or create uncertainty about our business strategies or

30

otherwise impact management's attention to operations. We face competition in attracting, hiring and retaining executives and key personnel who possess the skill sets and experiences that we seek. In particular, our performance is dependent upon the availability and retention of qualified personnel for our ongoing investments in our student support operations. Cost reduction measures due to declining enrollments, our recent operating losses and the negative publicity surrounding our industry make it difficult and more expensive to attract, hire and retain qualified and experienced personnel. In addition, key personnel may leave us and subsequently compete against us after any period they are contractually obligated not to pursue such activities. The loss of the services of our key personnel, or our failure to attract, integrate and retain other qualified and experienced personnel on acceptable terms and in a timely manner could adversely affect our results of operations or growth prospects.

Our credit facility and letters of credit are cash-collateralized and therefore may impact our liquidity.

The loans and letter of credit obligations under our credit facility are secured by 100% cash collateral. Further, any settlements or negative decisions in regulatory proceedings or other legal actions against us may reduce existing available cash balances. We therefore may have liquidity needs in the future which the credit facility will not meet. For example, we may not have the capacity to post required letters of credit we may need in the future for state licensing requirements, if we are required to satisfy ED's standards of financial responsibility on an alternative basis or for other purposes due to insufficient cash available to provide security. If cash generated by operations and existing cash balances are insufficient in the future to support our cash requirements, we would need to pursue other sources of liquidity, if available, such as additional sources of credit which may be more expensive, issuance of stock to new investors or a sale of assets.

We may be compelled to terminate programs due to regulatory considerations or declining enrollments and may incur additional costs and expenses, or fail to achieve anticipated cost savings and business efficiencies, associated with past or future exit or restructuring activities.

We must balance current student populations and projected changes in student population with appropriate levels of costs and investment in real estate and our online platforms. We have in the past decided to teach out certain programs due to existing regulatory considerations such as minimum placement rate standards, the 90-10 Rule, the gainful employment regulation and other factors, and we may need to cease offering additional programs as a result of the gainful employment or other regulations. We have also made the decision to teach out numerous campuses and pursue a transformation strategy aimed at reducing the complexity of operations and focusing our attention on our University Group institutions. Changes in the economy, regulatory environment or unavailability of Title IV Program funds may cause us to terminate additional programs.

Closing facilities or other exit activities involve costs and expenses which can be significant. Actual costs and expenses involved in closing facilities or other exit activities may be higher than expected. The benefits anticipated from closing facilities, other exit activities or restructuring activities such as those involved in our transformation strategy may be less than anticipated due to a number of factors including unanticipated expenses in teaching out campuses and higher than expected lease costs. Negative trends in the real estate market could impact the costs related to teaching out campuses and the success of our initiatives to reduce our real estate obligations. Finally, our transformation strategy may not achieve the anticipated cost savings and business efficiencies.

Our financial performance depends, in part, on our ability to keep pace with changing market needs and technology.

Increasingly, prospective employers of students who graduate from our institutions demand that their new employees possess appropriate technological skills and also appropriate “soft” skills, such as communication, critical thinking and teamwork skills. These skills can evolve rapidly in a changing economic and technological environment, so it is important for our institutions’ educational programs to evolve in response to those economic and technological changes. Current or prospective students or the employers of our graduates may not accept expansion of our existing programs, improved program content and the development of new programs. Even if our institutions are able to develop acceptable new and improved programs in a cost-effective manner, our institutions may not be able to begin offering them as quickly as prospective employers would like or as quickly as our competitors offer similar programs. If we are unable to adequately respond to changes in market requirements due to regulatory or financial constraints, rapid technological changes or other factors, our ability to attract and retain students could be impaired, the rates at which our graduates obtain jobs involving their fields of study could decline, and our results of operations and cash flows could be adversely affected.

Government regulations relating to the Internet could increase our cost of doing business or otherwise have a material adverse effect on our business.

The increasing popularity and use of the Internet and other online services has led and may lead to the adoption of new laws and regulatory practices in the United States or in foreign countries and to new interpretations of existing laws and regulations. These new laws and interpretations may relate to issues such as online privacy, copyrights, trademarks and service marks, sales taxes, fair business practices and the requirement that online education institutions qualify to do business as foreign corporations or be licensed in one or more jurisdictions where they have no physical location or other presence. New laws, regulations or interpretations related to doing business over the Internet could increase our costs and adversely affect enrollments.

31

We are subject to privacy and information security laws and regulations due to our collection and use of personal information, and any violations of those laws or regulations, or any breach, theft or loss of that information, could adversely affect our reputation and operations.

Our efforts to attract and enroll students result in us collecting, using and keeping substantial amounts of personal information regarding applicants, our students, their families and alumni, including social security numbers and financial data. We also maintain personal information about our employees in the ordinary course of our activities. Our services, the services of many of our health plan and benefit plan vendors, and other information can be accessed globally through the Internet. We rely extensively on our network of interconnected applications and databases for day to day operations as well as financial reporting and the processing of financial transactions. Our computer networks and those of our vendors that manage confidential information for us or provide services to our students may be vulnerable to unauthorized access, inadvertent access or display, theft or misuse, hackers, computer viruses, or third parties in connection with hardware and software upgrades and changes. Such unauthorized access, misuse, theft or hacks could evade our intrusion detection and prevention precautions without alerting us to the breach or loss for some period of time or may never be detected. We have experienced malware and virus attacks on our systems which went undetected by our virus detection and prevention software. Regular patching of our computer systems and frequent updates to our virus detection and prevention software with the latest virus and malware signatures may not catch newly introduced malware and viruses or “zero-day” viruses, prior to their infecting our systems and potentially disrupting our data integrity, taking sensitive information or affecting financial transactions. Because our services can be accessed globally via the Internet, we may be subject to privacy laws in countries outside the U.S. from which students access our services, which laws may constrain the way we market and provide our services. While we utilize security and business controls to limit access to and use of personal information, any breach of student or employee privacy or errors in storing, using or transmitting personal information could violate privacy laws and regulations resulting in fines or other penalties. The adoption of new or modified state or federal data or cybersecurity legislation could increase our costs and/or require changes in our operating procedures or systems. A breach, theft or loss of personal information held by us or our vendors, or a violation of the laws and regulations governing privacy could have a material adverse effect on our reputation or result in lawsuits, additional regulation, remediation and compliance costs or investments in additional security systems to protect our computer networks, the costs of which may be substantial.

System disruptions and vulnerability from security risks to our online technology infrastructure could have a material adverse effect on our ability to attract and retain students.

For our online and ground-based campuses, the performance and reliability of program infrastructure is critical to their operations, reputation and ability to attract and retain students. Any computer system error or failure, significant increase in traffic on our computer networks, or any significant failure or unavailability of our computer networks, including but not limited to those as a result of natural disasters and network and telecommunications failures could materially disrupt our delivery of these programs. Any interruption to our institutions’ computer systems or operations could have a material adverse effect on our total student enrollment, our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Our computer networks 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 hackers may target our networks. 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 cannot ensure that these efforts will protect our computer networks against security breaches despite our regular monitoring of our technology infrastructure security.

Our institutions’ online programs’ success depends, in part, on our institutions’ ability to expand the content of their programs, develop new programs in a cost-effective manner, maintain good standing with regulators and accreditors, and meet students’ needs in a timely manner. New programs can be delayed due to current and future unforeseen regulatory restrictions. Furthermore, our regulators may impose additional restrictions or conditions on the manner in which we offer online courses to our students, any one of which could negatively impact our business or results of operations.

Any general decline in Internet use for any reason, including security or privacy concerns, cost of Internet service or changes in government regulation, could result in less demand for online educational services and inhibit growth in our online programs.

We may incur liability for the unauthorized duplication or distribution of class materials posted online for class discussions.

In some instances our faculty members or our students may post various articles or other third-party content on class discussion boards or download third-party content to personal computers. We may incur claims or liability for the unauthorized duplication or distribution of this material. Any such claims could subject us to costly litigation and could impose a strain on our financial resources and management personnel regardless of whether the claims have merit.

32

We rely on proprietary rights and intellectual property in conducting our business, which may not be adequately protected under current laws, and we may encounter disputes from time to time relating to our use of intellectual property of third parties.

Our success depends in part on our ability to protect our proprietary rights. We rely on a combination of copyrights, trademarks, service marks, trade secrets, domain names and agreements to protect our proprietary rights. We rely on service mark and trademark protection in the United States and select foreign jurisdictions to protect our rights to our marks as well as distinctive logos and other marks associated with our services. These measures may not be adequate, and we can’t be certain that we have secured, or will be able to secure, appropriate protections for all of our proprietary rights. Unauthorized third parties may attempt to duplicate the proprietary aspects of our curricula, online resource material and other content despite our efforts to protect these rights. Our management’s attention may be diverted by these attempts, and we may need to use funds for lawsuits to protect our proprietary rights against any infringement or violation.

These and other risks exist with respect to our intellipath™ personalized learning technology, which incorporates technology that we have a perpetual but non-exclusive license to use. We receive software support for the intellipath technology from CCKF, a Dublin-based educational technology company in which we have an equity investment. If CCKF ceases to operate or otherwise becomes unable to work with our institutions, it would be necessary to either develop the ability to support the software using our own resources or engage another third party vendor to provide these services, which transition could be economically disadvantageous, cause an interruption in the use of the technology and present a distraction to management and applicable business units, any of which could negatively impact our business.

We may encounter disputes from time to time over rights and obligations concerning intellectual property, and we may not prevail in these disputes. Third parties may raise a claim against us alleging an infringement or violation of the intellectual property of that third party. Some third party intellectual property rights may be extremely broad, and it may not be possible for us to conduct our operations in such a way as to avoid those intellectual property rights. Any such intellectual property claim could subject us to costly litigation and impose a significant strain on our financial resources and management personnel regardless of whether such claim has merit.

We may incur liability for the unauthorized duplication or distribution of class materials posted online for class discussions.

In some instances, our faculty members or our students may post various articles or other third-party content on class discussion boards or download third-party content to personal computers. We may incur claims or liability for the unauthorized duplication or distribution of this material. Any such claims could subject us to costly litigation and could impose a strain on our financial resources and management personnel regardless of whether the claims have merit.

Risks Related to Our Business Technology Infrastructure

The personal information that we collect may be vulnerable to breach, theft or loss which could adversely affect our reputation and operations.

In the ordinary course of our business, we maintain on our network systems, and on the networks of our third-party providers, certain information that is confidential, proprietary, personal (such as student information), or otherwise sensitive in nature, including financial information and confidential business information. Our computer networks and those of our vendors that manage confidential information for us or provide services to our students or us can be accessed globally through the internet and are vulnerable to unauthorized access, inadvertent access or display, theft or misuse, hackers, installation of ransomware and malware and computer viruses, during regular use and in connection with hardware and software upgrades and changes. These attacks have become

30

more prevalent and sophisticated. Unauthorized access, misuse, theft or hacks can evade our intrusion detection and prevention precautions without alerting us to the breach or loss for some period of time or may never be detected. A user who circumvents security measures could misappropriate confidential or proprietary information or personal information about our students or employees or could cause interruptions or malfunctions in operations or commit fraud. We have experienced malware and virus attacks on our systems which went undetected by our virus detection and prevention software. Regular patching of our computer systems and frequent updates to our virus detection and prevention software with the latest virus and malware signatures may not catch newly introduced malware, ransomware, viruses or “zero-day” viruses, prior to their infecting our systems and potentially disrupting our data integrity, taking sensitive information or affecting financial transactions.

In addition to being subject to privacy and information security laws and regulations in the U.S., because our services can be accessed globally via the Internet, we may also be subject to privacy laws in countries outside the U.S. from which students access our services, which laws may constrain the way we market and provide our services. Any breach of student or employee privacy or errors in storing, using or transmitting personal information could violate privacy laws and regulations resulting in fines or other penalties. The adoption of new or modified state or federal data or cybersecurity legislation could increase our costs and require changes in our operating procedures or systems. An example of this is the California Consumer Privacy Act which became effective January 1, 2020.

A breach, theft or loss of personal information held by us or our vendors, or a violation of the laws and regulations governing privacy, could have a material adverse effect on our reputation or result in lawsuits, additional regulation, remediation and compliance costs or investments in additional security systems to protect our computer networks, the costs of which may be substantial.

System disruptions and vulnerability from security risks to our online technology infrastructure could have a material adverse effect on our ability to attract and retain students.

For our online and ground-based campuses, the performance and reliability of program infrastructure is critical to their operations, reputation and ability to attract and retain students. Any computer system or software error or failure, significant increase in traffic on our computer networks, or any significant failure or unavailability of our computer networks or third-party software, including but not limited to those as a result of natural disasters and network and telecommunications failures, could materially disrupt our delivery of these programs. Any interruption to our institutions’ computer systems or operations could have a material adverse effect on our student enrollments.

As discussed above, our computer networks and those of our vendors are also vulnerable to unauthorized access, installation of ransomware or malware, computer hackers, computer viruses, denial of service attacks and other security threats. A user who circumvents security measures could misappropriate proprietary information or cause interruptions or malfunctions in operations. Due to the sensitive nature of the information contained on our networks, hackers may target our networks. We expend significant resources to protect against the threat of these security breaches and may incur significant expenditures to alleviate problems caused by these breaches. We cannot ensure that our efforts will protect our computer networks against security breaches despite our regular monitoring of our technology infrastructure security.

Any general decline in Internet use for any reason, including security or privacy concerns, cost of Internet service or changes in government regulation, could result in less demand for online educational services and inhibit growth in our online programs.

Our remote work environment in response to the COVID-19 pandemic may exacerbate the risks related to our business technology infrastructure.

We transitioned almost all of our employees to remote work, as have a number of our third-party service vendors, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. This transition to a remote work environment may exacerbate certain risks to our business, including increasing the stress on, and our vulnerability to disruptions of, our technology infrastructure and systems, and increased risk of phishing and other cybersecurity attacks, unauthorized dissemination of confidential information and social engineering attempts that seek to exploit the COVID-19 pandemic. If a natural disaster, power outage, connectivity issue or other event occurs that impacts the ability of employees to work remotely, it may be difficult or, in certain cases, impossible, for us to continue our business for a period of time, which could be substantial. While most of our operations can be performed remotely, there is no guarantee that we will be as effective while working remotely because our team is dispersed, many employees may have additional personal needs to attend to (such as looking after children as a result of school closures or family who become sick), and employees may become sick themselves and be unable to work.

Government regulations relating to the Internet could increase our cost of doing business or otherwise have a material adverse effect on our business.

The increasing use of the Internet and other online services has led and may lead to the adoption of new laws and regulatory practices in the United States or in foreign countries and to new interpretations of existing laws and regulations. These new laws and interpretations may relate to issues such as online privacy, copyrights, trademarks and service marks, sales and use taxes, fair business practices and the requirement that online education institutions qualify to do business as foreign corporations or be licensed in one or more jurisdictions where they have no physical location or other presence. New laws, regulations or interpretations related to doing business over the Internet could increase our costs and adversely affect enrollments.

31

Risk Related to Our Common Stock

The trading price of our common stock may continue to fluctuate substantially in the future.future, and as a result returns on an investment in our common stock may be volatile.

The trading price of our common stock has and may fluctuate significantly as a result of a number of factors, some of which are not in our control. These factors include:

Changes in the trading price of our common stock may occur without regard to our operating performance, and the price of our common stock could fluctuate significantly more than the market as a whole; and

based upon factors that have little or nothing to do with our company. Further, the trading volume of our common stock is relatively low, which may cause our stock price to react more to these variousthe above and other factors andfactors. The fluctuations in the trading price of our common stock may impact an investor’s ability to sell their shares at the desired time at a price considered satisfactory. These factors may adversely affect the trading price of our common stock, regardless of our actual operating performance, and could prevent an investor from selling sharessatisfactory, including at or above the price at which the investor acquired them.

None.

33

Our University Group ground-based campuses are located primarily inand their respective facilities include AIU Atlanta (Atlanta, GA), AIU Houston (Houston, TX), CTU Colorado GeorgiaSprings (Colorado Springs, CO) and Texas.CTU Denver South (Aurora, CO). These campuses generally consist of teaching facilities, including classrooms and laboratories, and admissions and administrative offices. Additionally, we have admissions and administrative facilities located in the areas of Chicago, Illinois andIllinois; Phoenix, Arizona and Cypress, California, which are used primarily for our universities and corporate functions.

Almost allAt the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in March of 2020, we transitioned our workforce to a remote work environment. The transition to a remote work environment was supported by our scalable and innovative technology infrastructure which enabled us to make these changes with minimal disruptions to our business operations. With the success of this transition, the Company made the decision during 2021 to allow its employees to continue in a hybrid work environment, which allows employees with the flexibility of working remote or working from the corporate or campus locations when needed, and as a result, allows the Company to continue to look for ways to optimize our leased space.

All of our campus and administrative facilities are leased.leased except one in Houston, Texas. As of December 31, 20172021 we leased approximately 1.70.8 million square feet under lease agreements related to our continuing operations that have remaining terms ranging from less than one year to ten years. As of December 31, 2017, we leased approximately 0.4 million square feet under lease agreements related to our discontinued operations that have remaining terms ranging from one to two years. As of December 31, 2017, we ownedthrough 2032. The facility in Houston, Texas, is used by AIU and is less than 0.1 million square feet of real property utilized by American InterContinental University located in Houston, Texas.property.  

See Item 1, “Business,” for a listing of our campus locations. The listing excludes institutions that have been sold and campuses that have ceased operations.

We actively monitor our real estate needs in light of our current utilization and projected student enrollment levels. A key goal is to mitigate overall operating expenses by disposing of excess properties as student enrollments shrink at campuses that are in teach-out. In addition, to continue to provide facilities and services that will effectively serve our students, we invested in additional real estate space in 2017 for our admissions and advising centers in the Phoenix, Arizona, area.32

Note 11See note 12 “Contingencies” to our consolidated financial statements in Part IV, Item 15 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K is incorporated herein by reference.10-K.

Not applicable.

3433

PART II

Our common stock is listed for trading on the NASDAQNasdaq Global Select Market (“NASDAQ”Nasdaq”) under the symbol “CECO.”

The following table sets forth the range of high and low sales prices per share for our common stock as reported on the NASDAQ:

“PRDO”.

The closing price of our common stock as reported on the NASDAQNasdaq on February 16, 201818, 2022 was $11.90$10.21 per share. As of February 16, 2018,21, 2022, there were approximately 110113 holders of record of our common stock.stock, including The Depository Trust Company, which holds shares of our common stock on behalf of an indeterminate number of beneficial owners.

Our common stock transfer agent and registrar is Computershare Trust Company, N.A. They can be contacted at P.O. Box# 505000, Louisville, KY 40233-5000 or at their website www.computershare.com/investor.

We haveOur Company has never paid cash dividends on our common stock and we have no current plan to do so in the foreseeable future.so. The declaration and payment of dividends on our common stock are subject to the discretion of our Board of Directors. The decision of our Board of Directors to pay future dividends will depend on general business conditions, the effect of a dividend payment on our financial condition, and other factors the Board of Directors may consider relevant. In addition, our credit facility limits the payment of cash dividends. The current policy of our Board of Directors is to reinvest earnings in our operations to promote future growth and, from time to time, to execute repurchases of shares of our common stock under the stock repurchase program discussed below. The repurchase of shares of our common stock reduces the amount of cash available to pay cash dividends to our common stockholders. In addition, our ability to pay cash dividends on our common stock is also limited under the terms of our existing credit agreement. As of December 31, 2021, we are in compliance with the covenants of our credit agreement.

We did not repurchase anyDuring 2021, we repurchased 2.3 million shares of our common stock during the year ended December 31, 2017 except for shares delivered back to the Company for paymentapproximately $25.3 million at an average price of withholding taxes from employees for vesting restricted stock units. Under$10.94 per share under the Company’s previously authorizedcurrent stock repurchase program. The timing of purchases and the number of shares repurchased under the program are determined by the Company’s management and depend on a variety of factors including stock repurchasesprice, trading volume and other general market and economic conditions, its assessment of alternative uses of capital, regulatory requirements and other factors. Repurchases will be made in open market transactions, including block purchases, conducted in accordance with Rule 10b-18 under the Exchange Act as well as may be made onpursuant to trading plans established under Rule 10b5-1 under the open market or in privately negotiated transactionsExchange Act, which would permit shares to be repurchased when the Company might otherwise be precluded from time to time, depending on factors including market conditions and corporate and regulatory requirements.doing so under insider trading laws. The stock repurchase program does not have anobligate the Company to purchase shares and the Company may, in its discretion, begin, suspend or terminate repurchases at any time, without any prior notice. The program’s original expiration date and may be suspended or discontinued at any time.was December 31, 2021. On October 19, 2021, the Board of Directors of the Company extended the expiration date of the program to February 28, 2022. As of December 31, 2017,2021, approximately $183.3$2.9 million was available under the stock repurchase program.

35On January 27, 2022 the Board of Directors of the Company approved a new stock repurchase program for up to $50.0 million which commences March 1, 2022 and expires September 30, 2023.  The other terms of the new stock repurchase program are consistent with the Company’s current stock repurchase program described above which expires February 28, 2022.

Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities